lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2018]   [Jan]   [3]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
Date
SubjectRe: [PATCH] exec: Weaken dumpability for secureexec
On Tue, Jan 2, 2018 at 11:06 PM, Serge E. Hallyn <serge@hallyn.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 02, 2018 at 03:21:33PM -0800, Kees Cook wrote:
>> This is a logical revert of:
>>
>> commit e37fdb785a5f ("exec: Use secureexec for setting dumpability")
>>
>> This weakens dumpability back to checking only for uid/gid changes in
>> current (which is useless), but userspace depends on dumpability not
>> being tied to secureexec.
>>
>> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1528633
>>
>> Reported-by: Tom Horsley <horsley1953@gmail.com>
>> Fixes: e37fdb785a5f ("exec: Use secureexec for setting dumpability")
>> Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
>> Signed-off-by: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
>> ---
>> fs/exec.c | 9 +++++++--
>> 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/fs/exec.c b/fs/exec.c
>> index 5688b5e1b937..7eb8d21bcab9 100644
>> --- a/fs/exec.c
>> +++ b/fs/exec.c
>> @@ -1349,9 +1349,14 @@ void setup_new_exec(struct linux_binprm * bprm)
>>
>> current->sas_ss_sp = current->sas_ss_size = 0;
>>
>> - /* Figure out dumpability. */
>> + /*
>> + * Figure out dumpability. Note that this checking only of current
>> + * is wrong, but userspace depends on it. This should be testing
>> + * bprm->secureexec instead.
>> + */
>> if (bprm->interp_flags & BINPRM_FLAGS_ENFORCE_NONDUMP ||
>> - bprm->secureexec)
>> + !(uid_eq(current_euid(), current_uid()) &&
>> + gid_eq(current_egid(), current_gid())))
>
> So what about the pdeath_signal? Is that going to be another subtle
> time-bomb?

pdeath_signal used another wrong method to set itself, but it was
better than dumpable. I'd rather we leave it as-is, since I'd like to
have everything controlled by secureexec.

The more interesting thing here is that secureexec is set for a
process that ISN'T actually setuid. (ptrace of a setuid process). I
think tha'ts the real bug, but not something I'm going to be able to
fix quickly. So, for now, I want to revert this, then try to fix the
weird case, and see if that breaks anyone, then fix this back to
secureexec.

-Kees

--
Kees Cook
Pixel Security

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2018-01-03 18:21    [W:0.056 / U:16.968 seconds]
©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site