lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2018]   [Sep]   [29]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH 2/3] namei: implement AT_THIS_ROOT chroot-like path resolution
From
Date


> On Sep 29, 2018, at 9:35 AM, Jann Horn <jannh@google.com> wrote:
>
> +cc linux-api; please keep them in CC for future versions of the patch
>
>> On Sat, Sep 29, 2018 at 4:29 PM Aleksa Sarai <cyphar@cyphar.com> wrote:
>> The primary motivation for the need for this flag is container runtimes
>> which have to interact with malicious root filesystems in the host
>> namespaces. One of the first requirements for a container runtime to be
>> secure against a malicious rootfs is that they correctly scope symlinks
>> (that is, they should be scoped as though they are chroot(2)ed into the
>> container's rootfs) and ".."-style paths. The already-existing AT_XDEV
>> and AT_NO_PROCLINKS help defend against other potential attacks in a
>> malicious rootfs scenario.
>
> So, I really like the concept for patch 1 of this series (but haven't
> read the code yet); but I dislike this patch because of its footgun
> potential.
>

The code could do it differently: do the path walk and then, before accepting the result, walk back up and make sure the result is under the starting point.

This is *not* a full solution, though, since a walk above the root gas side effects on timing, various caches, and possibly network traffic, so it’s open to Spectre-like attacks in which a malicious container could use a runtime-initiated AT_THIS_ROOT to infer the existence of directories outside the container.

But what’s the container usecase? Any sane container is based on pivot_root or similar, so the runtime can just do the walk in the container context. IOW I’m a bit confused as to the exact intended use of the whole series. Can you elaborate?
\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2018-09-29 19:25    [W:0.312 / U:1.492 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site