lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2010]   [Jun]   [1]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH v2] fs: block cross-uid sticky symlinks
On Tue, Jun 01, 2010 at 03:55:29AM -0400, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Mon, May 31, 2010 at 08:24:23PM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
> > Well, that's what I'm trying to understand. It sounds like there is some
> > general agreement that the issue needs to be solved, but some folks do not
> > want it in the core VFS. As in, the objections aren't with how symlink
> > behavior is changed, just that the changes would be in the fs/ directory.
>
> No, it's not. It's not a change we can make for the default that
> everyone uses. If you're keen to mess up installations you control (aka
> ubuntu valuedadd viper) push it into a special LSM or rather a
> non-standard rule for it. It really doesn't matter if it's in fs/ or
> security/ but it's simplify not going to happen by default.

Okay, thanks; that clarifies some of my confusion. It sounds like
there are some people that genuinely believe that the symlink-following
logic should not change. I would pose, then, a question of "what
are legitimate and safe situations that require following cross-user
symlinks in a sticky world-writable directory?" And if the answers to
that aren't very convincing, then I think it's reasonable to include at
least an option to change the behavior.

> > My rationale is that if it's in commoncaps, it's effective for everyone, so
> > it might as well be in core VFS. If the VFS objections really do boil down
> > to "not in fs/" then I'm curious if doing this in commoncaps is acceptable.
>
> If you think the objection is about having things in fs/ you're smoking
> some really bad stuff.

Right, that was my point exactly. It didn't make sense to object to it
being in fs/. The objection was to having it in the kernel at all. So now
I can focus my efforts on convincing people about the value of making this
a setting in the kernel, like turning on or off TCP syn-flood protection.
Some people may demand it, some people may hate it, but the choice it
up to the end user.

-Kees

--
Kees Cook
Ubuntu Security Team


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2010-06-01 17:05    [W:0.057 / U:26.140 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site