Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754957Ab1F2PQJ (ORCPT ); Wed, 29 Jun 2011 11:16:09 -0400 Received: from out4.smtp.messagingengine.com ([66.111.4.28]:47863 "EHLO out4.smtp.messagingengine.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752043Ab1F2PQI (ORCPT ); Wed, 29 Jun 2011 11:16:08 -0400 X-Sasl-enc: MFZlGeuk9YbJ3pZf5019xq39tmloq+NiVnU81Ewsxk6K 1309360566 Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2011 08:05:54 -0700 From: Greg KH To: John Johansen Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] AppArmor: Fix masking of capabilities in complain mode Message-ID: <20110629150554.GA18023@kroah.com> References: <1309311874-23262-1-git-send-email-john.johansen@canonical.com> <1309311874-23262-3-git-send-email-john.johansen@canonical.com> <20110629042440.GC18344@kroah.com> <4E0ADA66.9070004@canonical.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4E0ADA66.9070004@canonical.com> 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 Content-Length: 2006 Lines: 47 On Wed, Jun 29, 2011 at 08:55:18AM +0100, John Johansen wrote: > On 06/29/2011 05:24 AM, Greg KH wrote: > > On Wed, Jun 29, 2011 at 02:44:34AM +0100, John Johansen wrote: > >> AppArmor is masking the capabilities returned by capget against the > >> capabilities mask in the profile. This is wrong, in complain mode the > >> profile has effectively all capabilities, as the profile restrictions are > >> not being enforced, merely tested against to determine if an access is > >> known by the profile. > >> > >> This can result in the wrong behavior of security conscience applications > >> like sshd which examine their capability set, and change their behavior > >> accordingly. In this case because of the masked capability set being > >> returned sshd fails due to DAC checks, even when the profile is in complain > >> mode. > >> > >> Kernels affected: 2.6.36 - 3.0. > >> > >> Signed-off-by: John Johansen > >> --- > > > > You say that multiple kernels are affected, then why not also include > > stable@kernel.org here as well? > > > > confused, > > > Sorry I should have elaborated, I think its a borderline case for stable > release, and was as much a note to my self as anything. Notes to self probably shouldn't be in kernel changelog entries :) > The bug doesn't affect the enforcement of policy, only learning mode used > for generating policy, and it is something we can work around in userspace. > for already released kernels. > > I can resend with a Cc: stable if you would like If you don't think it should be in the stable kernel releases, that's fine, you are the maintainer of the code. I just found it odd that you said it affected older kernels and yet didn't want it applied there as well. greg k-h -- 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/