Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756060Ab3JICBE (ORCPT ); Tue, 8 Oct 2013 22:01:04 -0400 Received: from smtprelay0013.hostedemail.com ([216.40.44.13]:36052 "EHLO smtprelay.hostedemail.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753958Ab3JICBC (ORCPT ); Tue, 8 Oct 2013 22:01:02 -0400 X-Session-Marker: 6A6F6540706572636865732E636F6D X-Spam-Summary: 10,1,0,,d41d8cd98f00b204,joe@perches.com,:::::::::::::::::::::::,RULES_HIT:41:69:196:355:379:541:599:967:973:988:989:1260:1261:1277:1311:1313:1314:1345:1359:1373:1437:1515:1516:1518:1534:1542:1593:1594:1622:1711:1730:1747:1777:1792:1963:2393:2525:2553:2561:2564:2682:2685:2693:2828:2859:2894:2895:2901:2933:2937:2939:2942:2945:2947:2951:2954:3022:3138:3139:3140:3141:3142:3355:3622:3657:3865:3866:3867:3868:3871:3872:3874:3934:3936:3938:3941:3944:3947:3950:3953:3956 X-HE-Tag: rod59_870227d9755b X-Filterd-Recvd-Size: 4086 Message-ID: <1381284056.23937.49.camel@joe-AO722> Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] vsprintf: Check real user/group id for %pK From: Joe Perches To: Ryan Mallon Cc: Andrew Morton , eldad@fogrefinery.com, Jiri Kosina , jgunthorpe@obsidianresearch.com, Dan Rosenberg , Kees Cook , Alexander Viro , "Eric W. Biederman" , George Spelvin , "kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" Date: Tue, 08 Oct 2013 19:00:56 -0700 In-Reply-To: <5254B787.6080700@gmail.com> References: <5254A034.5020700@gmail.com> <1381279758.23937.42.camel@joe-AO722> <1381282200.23937.45.camel@joe-AO722> <5254B787.6080700@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.6.4-0ubuntu1 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2985 Lines: 70 On Wed, 2013-10-09 at 12:55 +1100, Ryan Mallon wrote: > On 09/10/13 12:30, Joe Perches wrote: > > On Tue, 2013-10-08 at 17:49 -0700, Joe Perches wrote: > >> On Wed, 2013-10-09 at 11:15 +1100, Ryan Mallon wrote: > >>> Some setuid binaries will allow reading of files which have read > >>> permission by the real user id. This is problematic with files which > >>> use %pK because the file access permission is checked at open() time, > >>> but the kptr_restrict setting is checked at read() time. If a setuid > >>> binary opens a %pK file as an unprivileged user, and then elevates > >>> permissions before reading the file, then kernel pointer values may be > >>> leaked. > >> > >> I think it should explicitly test 0. > > > > Also, Documentation/sysctl/kernel.txt should be updated too. > > > > Here's a suggested patch: > > > > --- > > Documentation/sysctl/kernel.txt | 14 ++++++++------ > > lib/vsprintf.c | 38 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++------------ > > 2 files changed, 34 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/Documentation/sysctl/kernel.txt b/Documentation/sysctl/kernel.txt > > index 9d4c1d1..eac53d5 100644 > > --- a/Documentation/sysctl/kernel.txt > > +++ b/Documentation/sysctl/kernel.txt > > @@ -290,13 +290,15 @@ Default value is "/sbin/hotplug". > > kptr_restrict: > > > > This toggle indicates whether restrictions are placed on > > -exposing kernel addresses via /proc and other interfaces. When > > -kptr_restrict is set to (0), there are no restrictions. When > > -kptr_restrict is set to (1), the default, kernel pointers > > +exposing kernel addresses via /proc and other interfaces. > > + > > +When kptr_restrict is set to (0), there are no restrictions. > > +When kptr_restrict is set to (1), the default, kernel pointers > > printed using the %pK format specifier will be replaced with 0's > > -unless the user has CAP_SYSLOG. When kptr_restrict is set to > > -(2), kernel pointers printed using %pK will be replaced with 0's > > -regardless of privileges. > > +unless the user has CAP_SYSLOG and effective user and group ids > > +are equal to the real ids. > > +When kptr_restrict is set to (2), kernel pointers printed using > > +%pK will be replaced with 0's regardless of privileges. > > I'll add this, thanks. > > I'm less fussed about the suggestions for the logic. The current test is > small and concise. The logic ends up the same to the compiler, but it's human readers that want simple and clear. > The original also does the in_irq tests regardless of > the kptr_restrict setting since they are mostly intended to catch > internal kernel bugs. Not so. http://marc.info/?l=linux-security-module&m=129303800912245&w=4 https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/7/13/428 -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/