Thread (6 messages) 6 messages, 4 authors, 2019-11-13

Re: [PATCH] Allow restricting permissions in /proc/sys

flat view

From: Topi Miettinen <hidden>
Date: 2019-11-13 16:19:25
Also in: linux-fsdevel, lkml

On 13.11.2019 18.00, Jann Horn wrote:
On Wed, Nov 13, 2019 at 12:22 AM Christian Brauner
[off-list ref] wrote:
quoted
On Sun, Nov 03, 2019 at 04:55:48PM +0200, Topi Miettinen wrote:
quoted
Several items in /proc/sys need not be accessible to unprivileged
tasks. Let the system administrator change the permissions, but only
to more restrictive modes than what the sysctl tables allow.

Signed-off-by: Topi Miettinen <redacted>
---
  fs/proc/proc_sysctl.c | 41 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------
  1 file changed, 31 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/proc/proc_sysctl.c b/fs/proc/proc_sysctl.c
index d80989b6c344..88c4ca7d2782 100644
--- a/fs/proc/proc_sysctl.c
+++ b/fs/proc/proc_sysctl.c
@@ -818,6 +818,10 @@ static int proc_sys_permission(struct inode *inode, int
mask)
         if ((mask & MAY_EXEC) && S_ISREG(inode->i_mode))
                 return -EACCES;

+       error = generic_permission(inode, mask);
+       if (error)
+               return error;
In kernel/ucount.c, the ->permissions handler set_permissions() grants
access based on whether the caller has CAP_SYS_RESOURCE. And in
net/sysctl_net.c, the handler net_ctl_permissions() grants access
based on whether the caller has CAP_NET_ADMIN. This added check is
going to break those, right?
Right. The comment above seems then a bit misleading:
	/*
	 * sysctl entries that are not writeable,
	 * are _NOT_ writeable, capabilities or not.
	 */

-Topi
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help