Messages in this thread | | | From | Andrew Lutomirski <> | Date | Thu, 12 Jan 2012 17:11:39 -0800 | Subject | Re: [PATCH PLACEHOLDER 1/3] fs/exec: "always_unprivileged" patch |
| |
On Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 4:57 PM, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> wrote: > On Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 4:42 PM, Andrew Lutomirski <luto@mit.edu> wrote: >> >> That may prevent another use: set this new flag, chroot, drop >> privileges, accept network connections. (The idea being that chroot >> might work unprivileged if this flag is set.) > > Well, if you have privileges, then just do > > chroot(); > drop privileges > > and if you depend on the new flag, then you do > > drop privileges > set new flag > chroot > > and if you want to work either way then you just do > > error = chroot > drop privileges > set new flag > if error > chroot > > which does the right thing regardless of whether you had privileges > and/or a new kernel or not. > > In any of the three cases I don't see why you'd ever want to drop > privileges *after* setting the new flag.
Hmm...
What if you're a daemon that needs something like CAP_NET_BIND but also wants to be able to run other helpers without CAP_NET_BIND?
(Also, preventing dropping of privileges will probably make a patch more complicted -- I'll have to find and update all the places that allow dropping privileges.)
--Andy -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |