[PATCH v2 1/3] capabilities: Introduce CAP_CHECKPOINT_RESTORE
Cyrill Gorcunov
gorcunov at gmail.com
Wed Jun 3 17:01:35 UTC 2020
On Wed, Jun 03, 2020 at 06:23:26PM +0200, Adrian Reber wrote:
...
>
> /*
> - * Only allow CAP_SYS_ADMIN to follow the links, due to concerns about how the
> - * symlinks may be used to bypass permissions on ancestor directories in the
> - * path to the file in question.
> + * Only allow CAP_SYS_ADMIN and CAP_CHECKPOINT_RESTORE to follow the links, due
> + * to concerns about how the symlinks may be used to bypass permissions on
> + * ancestor directories in the path to the file in question.
> */
> static const char *
> proc_map_files_get_link(struct dentry *dentry,
> struct inode *inode,
> struct delayed_call *done)
> {
> - if (!capable(CAP_SYS_ADMIN))
> + if (!(capable(CAP_SYS_ADMIN) || capable(CAP_CHECKPOINT_RESTORE)))
> return ERR_PTR(-EPERM);
You know, I'm still not sure if we need this capable() check at all since
we have proc_fd_access_allowed() called but anyway can we please make this
if() condition more explicit
if (!capable(CAP_SYS_ADMIN) && !capable(CAP_CHECKPOINT_RESTORE))
return ERR_PTR(-EPERM);
though I won't insist. And I'll reread the series a bit later once I've
some spare time to.
More information about the Linux-security-module-archive
mailing list