On Sun, Feb 19, 2012 at 4:49 AM, Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxx> wrote: > > * Kees Cook <keescook@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> This is the other half of link restrictions, now that symlink >> restriction has landed in -mm. > > Nice features! Thanks! >> @@ -300,9 +302,29 @@ config PROTECTED_STICKY_SYMLINKS_ENABLED >> via /proc/sys/kernel/protected_sticky_symlinks. >> >> config PROTECTED_STICKY_SYMLINKS_ENABLED_SYSCTL >> - depends on PROTECTED_STICKY_SYMLINKS >> + depends on PROTECTED_LINKS >> int >> default "1" if PROTECTED_STICKY_SYMLINKS_ENABLED >> default "0" >> >> +config PROTECTED_NONACCESS_HARDLINKS_ENABLED >> + depends on PROTECTED_LINKS >> + bool "Disallow hardlink creation to non-accessible files" >> + default y >> + help >> + Solve ToCToU hardlink race vulnerabilities by permitting hardlinks >> + to be created only when to a regular file that is owned by the user, >> + or is readable and writable by the user. Also blocks users from >> + "pinning" vulnerable setuid/setgid programs from being upgraded by >> + the administrator. >> + >> + When PROC_SYSCTL is enabled, this setting can also be controlled >> + via /proc/sys/kernel/protected_nonaccess_hardlinks. > > I'd add a: > > See Documentation/sysctl/fs.txt for details. > > line as well. Good call. >> +config PROTECTED_NONACCESS_HARDLINKS_ENABLED_SYSCTL >> + depends on PROTECTED_LINKS >> + int >> + default "1" if PROTECTED_NONACCESS_HARDLINKS_ENABLED >> + default "0" > > Naming nit: how about dropping the _NONACCESS/_nonaccess names > complete and turn it into protected_hardlinks? The longer > variant is not any better descriptive, and needlessly longer. > > The PROTECTED_SYMLINKS/PROTECTED_HARDLINKS naming is thus also > nicely symmetric. Yeah, this really does look much better. I had opted for extreme verbosity, but I would agree: it's not really called for here. >> +#ifdef CONFIG_AUDIT >> + if (error) { >> + struct audit_buffer *ab; >> + >> + ab = audit_log_start(current->audit_context, >> + GFP_KERNEL, AUDIT_AVC); >> + audit_log_format(ab, "op=linkat action=denied"); >> + audit_log_format(ab, " pid=%d comm=", current->pid); >> + audit_log_untrustedstring(ab, current->comm); >> + audit_log_d_path(ab, " path=", old_path); >> + audit_log_format(ab, " dev="); >> + audit_log_untrustedstring(ab, inode->i_sb->s_id); >> + audit_log_format(ab, " ino=%lu", inode->i_ino); >> + audit_log_end(ab); >> + } >> +#endif > > Small detail: don't these audit methods map to nothing on > !CONFIG_AUDIT, allowing the #ifdef to be dropped? (if not then > it should really be so.) Ah-ha; a more careful look at audit.h agrees. :) I'll adjust this as well. > Acked-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxx> Thanks for the review, -Kees -- Kees Cook ChromeOS Security -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html