[PATCH v2] xattr: Enable security.capability in user namespaces
Stefan Berger
stefanb at linux.vnet.ibm.com
Wed Jul 12 19:19:46 UTC 2017
On 07/12/2017 01:53 PM, Vivek Goyal wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 11:05:11AM -0400, Stefan Berger wrote:
>
> [..]
>> @@ -301,14 +721,39 @@ ssize_t
>> __vfs_getxattr(struct dentry *dentry, struct inode *inode, const char *name,
>> void *value, size_t size)
>> {
>> - const struct xattr_handler *handler;
>> + const struct xattr_handler *handler = NULL;
>> + char *newname = NULL;
>> + int ret, userns_supt_xattr;
>> + struct user_namespace *userns = current_user_ns();
>> +
>> + userns_supt_xattr = (xattr_is_userns_supported(name, false) >= 0);
>> +
> Hi Stephan,
>
>> + do {
>> + kfree(newname);
>> +
>> + newname = xattr_userns_name(name, userns);
> ^^^
> Will name be pointing to a freed string in second iteration of loop.
Fixing for v3.
>
>> + if (IS_ERR(newname))
>> + return PTR_ERR(newname);
>> +
>> + if (!handler) {
>> + name = newname;
> Here we assign name and at the beginning of second iteration we free
> newname.
>
> Also I am not sure why do we do this assignment only if handler is NULL.
The handler shouldn't change but this optimization isn't helpful. Fixed
through this patch:
https://github.com/stefanberger/linux/commit/10828401b29a13f8c56f8fad0c0fb2690e4af878
>
> BTW, I set cap_sys_admin on a file outside usernamespace and then launched
> user namespace (mapping 1000 to 0). And then tried to do getcap on file
> and I am not seeing security.capability set by host. Not sure what am I
> doing wrong. getxattr() seems to return -ENODATA. Still debugging it.
This was a regression due to the bug in the loop. I didn't have a test
case (with runc) for it, now I do.
>
> Also, have we resovled the question of stacked filesystem like overlayfs.
> There we are switching creds to mounter's creds when doing operations on
> underlying filesystem. I am concenrned does that mean, we will get and
> return security.capability to caller in usernamespace instead of
> security.capability at uid=1000.
I would have to test this, otherwise I don't know. I'll try it out with
Docker.
Stefan
>
> Vivek
>
>> + handler = xattr_resolve_name(inode, &name);
>> + if (IS_ERR(handler)) {
>> + ret = PTR_ERR(handler);
>> + goto out;
>> + }
>> + if (!handler->get) {
>> + ret = -EOPNOTSUPP;
>> + goto out;
>> + }
>> + }
>> + ret = handler->get(handler, dentry, inode, name, value, size);
>> + userns = userns->parent;
>> + } while ((ret == -ENODATA) && userns && userns_supt_xattr);
>>
>> - handler = xattr_resolve_name(inode, &name);
>> - if (IS_ERR(handler))
>> - return PTR_ERR(handler);
>> - if (!handler->get)
>> - return -EOPNOTSUPP;
>> - return handler->get(handler, dentry, inode, name, value, size);
>> +out:
>> + kfree(newname);
>> + return ret;
>> }
>> EXPORT_SYMBOL(__vfs_getxattr);
>>
> Thanks
> Vivek
>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-security-module" in
the body of a message to majordomo at vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
More information about the Linux-security-module-archive
mailing list