Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752983AbZL2QFf (ORCPT ); Tue, 29 Dec 2009 11:05:35 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752277AbZL2QFd (ORCPT ); Tue, 29 Dec 2009 11:05:33 -0500 Received: from mail-ew0-f219.google.com ([209.85.219.219]:55444 "EHLO mail-ew0-f219.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752465AbZL2QFc convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Tue, 29 Dec 2009 11:05:32 -0500 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=PAcyor8fvL9d0I3VHMawx81bXVGVPsOfeaC4WUfOG7htRZIsZt4zde/OHsUozu/QOr ZfM9ley1l+yQiInqSJ45oAS/kGNHa2W/V4onitF+6mHP486EBTlFNKn1KDiqlzryz9wt pbQHq9Z+iSTZ3wrcw1/UlZ+FtR/VXUrVrjQpI= MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20091229151146.GA32153@us.ibm.com> References: <20091229050114.GC14362@heat> <20091229151146.GA32153@us.ibm.com> From: Bryan Donlan Date: Tue, 29 Dec 2009 11:05:09 -0500 Message-ID: <3e8340490912290805s103fb789y13acea4a84669b20@mail.gmail.com> Subject: Re: RFC: disablenetwork facility. (v4) To: "Serge E. Hallyn" Cc: "Eric W. Biederman" , Michael Stone , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org, Andi Kleen , David Lang , Oliver Hartkopp , Alan Cox , Herbert Xu , Valdis Kletnieks , Evgeniy Polyakov , "C. Scott Ananian" , James Morris , Bernie Innocenti , Mark Seaborn , Randy Dunlap , =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Am=E9rico_Wang?= , Tetsuo Handa , Samir Bellabes , Casey Schaufler , Pavel Machek , Al Viro Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1256 Lines: 22 On Tue, Dec 29, 2009 at 10:11 AM, Serge E. Hallyn wrote: > Eric, let me specifically point out a 'disable setuid-root' > problem on linux: root still owns most of the system even when > it's not privileged. ?So does "disable setuid-root" mean > we don't allow exec of setuid-root binaries at all, or that > we don't setuid to root, or that we just don't raise privileges > for setuid-root? I, for one, think it would be best to handle it exactly like the nosuid mount option - that is, pretend the file doesn't have any setuid bits set. There's no reason to deny execution; if the process would otherwise be able to execute it, it can also copy the file to make a non-suid version and execute that instead. And some programs can operate with reduced function without setuid. For example, screen comes to mind; it needs root to share screen sessions between multiple users, but can operate for a single user just fine without root, and indeed the latter is usually the default configuration. -- 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/