Re: [PATCH bpf-next] bpf, capabilities: introduce CAP_BPF
From: Kees Cook <hidden>
Date: 2019-09-30 21:31:57
Also in:
bpf, linux-security-module, netdev
On Sat, Sep 28, 2019 at 07:37:27PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
On Wed, 28 Aug 2019 21:07:24 -0700 Alexei Starovoitov [off-list ref] wrote:quoted
quoted
This won’t make me much more comfortable, since CAP_BPF lets it do an ever-growing set of nasty things. I’d much rather one or both of two things happen: 1. Give it CAP_TRACING only. It can leak my data, but it’s rather hard for it to crash my laptop, lose data, or cause other shenanigans. 2. Improve it a bit do all the privileged ops are wrapped by capset(). Does this make sense? I’m a security person on occasion. I find vulnerabilities and exploit them deliberately and I break things by accident on a regular basis. In my considered opinion, CAP_TRACING alone, even extended to cover part of BPF as I’ve described, is decently safe. Getting root with just CAP_TRACING will be decently challenging, especially if I don’t get to read things like sshd’s memory, and improvements to mitigate even that could be added. I am quite confident that attacks starting with CAP_TRACING will have clear audit signatures if auditing is on. I am also confident that CAP_BPF *will* allow DoS and likely privilege escalation, and this will only get more likely as BPF gets more widely used. And, if BPF-based auditing ever becomes a thing, writing to the audit daemon’s maps will be a great way to cover one’s tracks.CAP_TRACING, as I'm proposing it, will allow full tracefs access. I think Steven and Massami prefer that as well. That includes kprobe with probe_kernel_read. That also means mini-DoS by installing kprobes everywhere or running too much ftrace.I was talking with Kees at Plumbers about this, and we were talking about just using simple file permissions. I started playing with some patches to allow the tracefs be visible but by default it would only be visible by root. rwx------ Then a start up script (or perhaps mount options) could change the group owner, and change this to: rwxrwx--- Where anyone in the group assigned (say "tracing") gets full access to the file system. The more I was playing with this, the less I see the need for CAP_TRACING for ftrace and reading the format files.
Nice! Thanks for playing with this. I like it because it gives us a way to push policy into userspace (group membership, etc), and provides a clean way (hopefully) do separate "read" (kernel memory confidentiality) from "write" (kernel memory integrity), which wouldn't have been possible with a single new CAP_... -Kees -- Kees Cook