Re: [PATCH man-pages v2 3/4] process_madvise.2: CAP_SYS_ADMIN cleanup

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Hey Zach,

On 10/21/22 18:16, Zach O'Keefe wrote:
Hey Alex!

Thanks for taking the time to review!

On Fri, Oct 21, 2022 at 5:41 AM Alejandro Colomar
<alx.manpages@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On 10/21/22 14:37, Alejandro Colomar wrote:
On 10/19/22 01:50, Zach OKeefe wrote:
From: Zach O'Keefe <zokeefe@xxxxxxxxxx>

The initial commit of process_madvise(2) to man-pages project included
an error, indicating that CAP_SYS_ADMIN capability was required when, in
fact, CAP_SYS_NICE was the required capability.

The initial commit of process_madvise(2) to Linux, commit ecb8ac8b1f14
("mm/madvise: introduce process_madvise() syscall: an external memory
hinting API"), relied on PTRACE_MODE_ATTACH_FSCREDS (see ptrace(2)),
but was amended by commit 96cfe2c0fd23 ("mm/madvise: replace ptrace
attach requirement for process_madvise") which replaced this with a
combination of PTRACE_MODE_READ and CAP_SYS_NICE (PTRACE_MODE_READ to
prevent leaking ASLR metadata and CAP_SYS_NICE for influencing process
performance).

[...]

If I understand the paragraph above, from 5.10 to 5.12 the capability required
was CAP_SYS_ADMIN?

Or was it CAP_SYS_PTRACE?

Starting in 5.10, there was no CAP_* capability requirement - only
PTRACE_MODE_ATTACH_FSCREDS (aka PTRACE_MODE_ATTACH |
PTRACE_MODE_REALCREDS). Now, my understanding of the algorithm
employed for ptrace access mode checking isn't to be trusted, but
AFAIK, a caller having CAP_SYS_PTRACE in the target's user namespace
(directly or transitively) isn't required to pass this (though it
makes it easier). ptrace(2) has an overview of the algorithm.

Starting in 5.12, CAP_SYS_NICE was added as a requirement, and the
ptrace algorithm used changed to PTRACE_MODE_READ.

Understood.


If you think recording the differences in kernel versions in the
man-page is important, let me know and I can amend this patch.

Yes; since it was live during 2 versions, I think we should at least mention it. A couple of lines in NOTES might be enough.

Thanks,

Alex


Thanks,
Zcah

--
<http://www.alejandro-colomar.es/>

--
<http://www.alejandro-colomar.es/>

Attachment: OpenPGP_signature
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Documentation]     [Netdev]     [Linux Ethernet Bridging]     [Linux Wireless]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Security]     [Linux for Hams]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux Admin]     [Samba]

  Powered by Linux