Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751458AbaKKPhi (ORCPT ); Tue, 11 Nov 2014 10:37:38 -0500 Received: from mail-oi0-f49.google.com ([209.85.218.49]:53480 "EHLO mail-oi0-f49.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750999AbaKKPhg (ORCPT ); Tue, 11 Nov 2014 10:37:36 -0500 Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2014 09:37:32 -0600 From: Seth Forshee To: Miklos Szeredi Cc: "Eric W. Biederman" , "Serge H. Hallyn" , Andy Lutomirski , Michael j Theall , fuse-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, seth.forshee@canonical.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 3/4] fuse: Restrict allow_other to the superblock's namespace or a descendant Message-ID: <20141111153732.GC7906@ubuntu-hedt> Mail-Followup-To: Miklos Szeredi , "Eric W. Biederman" , "Serge H. Hallyn" , Andy Lutomirski , Michael j Theall , fuse-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org References: <1414013060-137148-1-git-send-email-seth.forshee@canonical.com> <1414013060-137148-4-git-send-email-seth.forshee@canonical.com> <20141111152737.GE333@tucsk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20141111152737.GE333@tucsk> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Nov 11, 2014 at 04:27:37PM +0100, Miklos Szeredi wrote: > On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 04:24:19PM -0500, Seth Forshee wrote: > > Unprivileged users are normally restricted from mounting with the > > allow_other option by system policy, but this could be bypassed > > for a mount done with user namespace root permissions. In such > > cases allow_oth er should not allow users outside the userns > > to access the mount as doing so would give the unprivileged user > > the ability to manipulate processes it would otherwise be unable > > to manipulate. Therefore access with allow_other should be > > restricted to users in the userns as the superblock or a > > descendant of that namespace. > > Fine. > > But aren't this kind of thing supposed to be prevented anyway by having private > mount namespace coupled with the pid-user-whatever namespace? > > It seems like being a bit too careful (not to say that that's a bad thing). A userns mount should be in a "private" mount namespace; specifically the user performing the mount must have CAP_SYS_ADMIN in mnt_ns->user_ns. The mount may still be accessible via /proc/pid/root though, and doing this ensures that in any case the user can never use the mount to manipulate processes that it can't already manipulate. Thanks, Seth -- 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/