From: Solar Designer <solar@openwall.com>
To: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Alexey Gladkov <legion@kernel.org>,
Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>, Shuah Khan <shuah@kernel.org>,
Christian Brauner <brauner@kernel.org>,
Ran Xiaokai <ran.xiaokai@zte.com.cn>,
containers@lists.linux-foundation.org,
Michal Koutn?? <mkoutny@suse.com>,
linux-api@vger.kernel.org, stable@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/5] rlimit: Fix RLIMIT_NPROC enforcement failure caused by capability calls in set_user
Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2022 18:42:20 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20220216174220.GA10389@openwall.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220216155832.680775-1-ebiederm@xmission.com>
On Wed, Feb 16, 2022 at 09:58:28AM -0600, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> Solar Designer <solar@openwall.com> wrote:
> > I'm not aware of anyone actually running into this issue and reporting
> > it. The systems that I personally know use suexec along with rlimits
> > still run older/distro kernels, so would not yet be affected.
> >
> > So my mention was based on my understanding of how suexec works, and
> > code review. Specifically, Apache httpd has the setting RLimitNPROC,
> > which makes it set RLIMIT_NPROC:
> >
> > https://httpd.apache.org/docs/2.4/mod/core.html#rlimitnproc
> >
> > The above documentation for it includes:
> >
> > "This applies to processes forked from Apache httpd children servicing
> > requests, not the Apache httpd children themselves. This includes CGI
> > scripts and SSI exec commands, but not any processes forked from the
> > Apache httpd parent, such as piped logs."
> >
> > In code, there are:
> >
> > ./modules/generators/mod_cgid.c: ( (cgid_req.limits.limit_nproc_set) && ((rc = apr_procattr_limit_set(procattr, APR_LIMIT_NPROC,
> > ./modules/generators/mod_cgi.c: ((rc = apr_procattr_limit_set(procattr, APR_LIMIT_NPROC,
> > ./modules/filters/mod_ext_filter.c: rv = apr_procattr_limit_set(procattr, APR_LIMIT_NPROC, conf->limit_nproc);
> >
> > For example, in mod_cgi.c this is in run_cgi_child().
> >
> > I think this means an httpd child sets RLIMIT_NPROC shortly before it
> > execs suexec, which is a SUID root program. suexec then switches to the
> > target user and execs the CGI script.
> >
> > Before 2863643fb8b9, the setuid() in suexec would set the flag, and the
> > target user's process count would be checked against RLIMIT_NPROC on
> > execve(). After 2863643fb8b9, the setuid() in suexec wouldn't set the
> > flag because setuid() is (naturally) called when the process is still
> > running as root (thus, has those limits bypass capabilities), and
> > accordingly execve() would not check the target user's process count
> > against RLIMIT_NPROC.
>
> In commit 2863643fb8b9 ("set_user: add capability check when
> rlimit(RLIMIT_NPROC) exceeds") capable calls were added to set_user to
> make it more consistent with fork. Unfortunately because of call site
> differences those capables calls were checking the credentials of the
s/capables/capable/
> user before set*id() instead of after set*id().
>
> This breaks enforcement of RLIMIT_NPROC for applications that set the
> rlimit and then call set*id() while holding a full set of
> capabilities. The capabilities are only changed in the new credential
> in security_task_fix_setuid().
>
> The code in apache suexec appears to follow this pattern.
>
> Commit 909cc4ae86f3 ("[PATCH] Fix two bugs with process limits
> (RLIMIT_NPROC)") where this check was added describes the targes of this
> capability check as:
>
> 2/ When a root-owned process (e.g. cgiwrap) sets up process limits and then
> calls setuid, the setuid should fail if the user would then be running
> more than rlim_cur[RLIMIT_NPROC] processes, but it doesn't. This patch
> adds an appropriate test. With this patch, and per-user process limit
> imposed in cgiwrap really works.
>
> So the original use case also of this check also appears to match the broken
> pattern.
Duplicate "also" - drop one.
> Restore the enforcement of RLIMIT_NPROC by removing the bad capable
> checks added in set_user. This unfortunately restores the
> inconsistencies state the code has been in for the last 11 years, but
s/inconsistencies/inconsistent/
> dealing with the inconsistencies looks like a larger problem.
>
> Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20210907213042.GA22626@openwall.com/
> Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20220212221412.GA29214@openwall.com
> Fixes: 2863643fb8b9 ("set_user: add capability check when rlimit(RLIMIT_NPROC) exceeds")
> History-Tree: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tglx/history.git
> Signed-off-by: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>
> ---
> kernel/sys.c | 3 +--
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/sys.c b/kernel/sys.c
> index ecc4cf019242..8dd938a3d2bf 100644
> --- a/kernel/sys.c
> +++ b/kernel/sys.c
> @@ -480,8 +480,7 @@ static int set_user(struct cred *new)
> * failure to the execve() stage.
> */
> if (is_ucounts_overlimit(new->ucounts, UCOUNT_RLIMIT_NPROC, rlimit(RLIMIT_NPROC)) &&
> - new_user != INIT_USER &&
> - !capable(CAP_SYS_RESOURCE) && !capable(CAP_SYS_ADMIN))
> + new_user != INIT_USER)
> current->flags |= PF_NPROC_EXCEEDED;
> else
> current->flags &= ~PF_NPROC_EXCEEDED;
Reviewed-by: Solar Designer <solar@openwall.com>
Alexander
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-02-16 17:42 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 78+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-02-07 12:17 [RFC PATCH 0/6] RLIMIT_NPROC in ucounts fixups Michal Koutný
2022-02-07 12:17 ` [RFC PATCH 1/6] set_user: Perform RLIMIT_NPROC capability check against new user credentials Michal Koutný
2022-02-10 1:14 ` Solar Designer
2022-02-10 1:57 ` Eric W. Biederman
2022-02-11 20:32 ` Eric W. Biederman
2022-02-12 22:14 ` Solar Designer
2022-02-15 11:55 ` Michal Koutný
2022-02-07 12:17 ` [RFC PATCH 2/6] set*uid: Check RLIMIT_PROC against new credentials Michal Koutný
2022-02-07 12:17 ` [RFC PATCH 3/6] cred: Count tasks by their real uid into RLIMIT_NPROC Michal Koutný
2022-02-07 12:17 ` [RFC PATCH 4/6] ucounts: Allow root to override RLIMIT_NPROC Michal Koutný
2022-02-10 0:21 ` Eric W. Biederman
2022-02-07 12:17 ` [RFC PATCH 5/6] selftests: Challenge RLIMIT_NPROC in user namespaces Michal Koutný
2022-02-10 1:22 ` Shuah Khan
2022-02-15 9:45 ` Michal Koutný
2022-02-07 12:18 ` [RFC PATCH 6/6] selftests: Test RLIMIT_NPROC in clone-created " Michal Koutný
2022-02-10 1:25 ` Shuah Khan
2022-02-15 9:34 ` Michal Koutný
2022-02-08 13:54 ` [RFC PATCH 0/6] RLIMIT_NPROC in ucounts fixups Eric W. Biederman
2022-02-11 2:01 ` [PATCH 0/8] ucounts: RLIMIT_NPROC fixes Eric W. Biederman
2022-02-11 2:13 ` [PATCH 1/8] ucounts: Fix RLIMIT_NPROC regression Eric W. Biederman
2022-02-14 18:37 ` Michal Koutný
2022-02-16 15:22 ` Eric W. Biederman
2022-02-11 2:13 ` [PATCH 2/8] ucounts: Fix set_cred_ucounts Eric W. Biederman
2022-02-15 11:10 ` Michal Koutný
2022-02-11 2:13 ` [PATCH 3/8] ucounts: Fix and simplify RLIMIT_NPROC handling during setuid()+execve Eric W. Biederman
2022-02-12 23:17 ` Solar Designer
2022-02-14 15:10 ` Eric W. Biederman
2022-02-14 17:43 ` Eric W. Biederman
2022-02-15 10:25 ` Michal Koutný
2022-02-16 15:35 ` Eric W. Biederman
2022-02-11 2:13 ` [PATCH 4/8] ucounts: Only except the root user in init_user_ns from RLIMIT_NPROC Eric W. Biederman
2022-02-15 10:54 ` Michal Koutný
2022-02-16 15:41 ` Eric W. Biederman
2022-02-11 2:13 ` [PATCH 5/8] ucounts: Handle wrapping in is_ucounts_overlimit Eric W. Biederman
2022-02-12 22:36 ` Solar Designer
2022-02-14 15:23 ` Eric W. Biederman
2022-02-14 15:23 ` Eric W. Biederman
2022-02-15 11:25 ` Michal Koutný
2022-02-14 17:16 ` David Laight
2022-02-11 2:13 ` [PATCH 6/8] ucounts: Handle inc_rlimit_ucounts wrapping in fork Eric W. Biederman
2022-02-11 11:34 ` Alexey Gladkov
2022-02-11 17:50 ` Eric W. Biederman
2022-02-11 18:32 ` Shuah Khan
2022-02-11 18:40 ` Alexey Gladkov
2022-02-11 19:56 ` Eric W. Biederman
2022-02-11 2:13 ` [PATCH 7/8] rlimit: For RLIMIT_NPROC test the child not the parent for capabilites Eric W. Biederman
2022-02-11 2:13 ` [PATCH 8/8] ucounts: Use the same code to enforce RLIMIT_NPROC in fork and exec Eric W. Biederman
2022-02-11 18:22 ` [PATCH 0/8] ucounts: RLIMIT_NPROC fixes Shuah Khan
2022-02-11 19:23 ` Eric W. Biederman
2022-02-15 11:37 ` Michal Koutný
2022-02-16 15:56 ` [PATCH v2 0/5] " Eric W. Biederman
2022-02-16 15:58 ` [PATCH v2 1/5] rlimit: Fix RLIMIT_NPROC enforcement failure caused by capability calls in set_user Eric W. Biederman
2022-02-16 17:42 ` Solar Designer [this message]
2022-02-16 15:58 ` [PATCH v2 2/5] ucounts: Enforce RLIMIT_NPROC not RLIMIT_NPROC+1 Eric W. Biederman
2022-02-16 15:58 ` [PATCH v2 3/5] ucounts: Base set_cred_ucounts changes on the real user Eric W. Biederman
2022-02-16 15:58 ` [PATCH v2 4/5] ucounts: Move RLIMIT_NPROC handling after set_user Eric W. Biederman
2022-02-16 15:58 ` [PATCH v2 5/5] ucounts: Handle wrapping in is_ucounts_overlimit Eric W. Biederman
2022-02-16 17:28 ` Shuah Khan
2022-02-18 15:34 ` [GIT PULL] ucounts: RLIMIT_NPROC fixes for v5.17 Eric W. Biederman
2022-02-20 19:05 ` pr-tracker-bot
2022-03-03 0:12 ` [GIT PULL] ucounts: Regression fix " Eric W. Biederman
2022-03-03 0:30 ` pr-tracker-bot
2022-02-12 15:32 ` [RFC PATCH 0/6] RLIMIT_NPROC in ucounts fixups Etienne Dechamps
2022-02-15 10:11 ` Michal Koutný
2022-02-23 0:57 ` Eric W. Biederman
2022-02-23 18:00 ` How should rlimits, suid exec, and capabilities interact? Eric W. Biederman
2022-02-23 19:44 ` Andy Lutomirski
2022-02-23 21:28 ` Willy Tarreau
2022-02-23 19:50 ` Linus Torvalds
2022-02-24 1:24 ` Eric W. Biederman
2022-02-24 1:41 ` Linus Torvalds
2022-02-24 2:12 ` Eric W. Biederman
2022-02-24 15:41 ` [PATCH] ucounts: Fix systemd LimigtNPROC with private users regression Eric W. Biederman
2022-02-24 16:28 ` Kees Cook
2022-02-24 18:53 ` Michal Koutný
2022-02-25 0:29 ` Eric W. Biederman
2022-02-24 3:00 ` How should rlimits, suid exec, and capabilities interact? David Laight
2022-02-24 1:32 ` Eric W. Biederman
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20220216174220.GA10389@openwall.com \
--to=solar@openwall.com \
--cc=brauner@kernel.org \
--cc=containers@lists.linux-foundation.org \
--cc=ebiederm@xmission.com \
--cc=keescook@chromium.org \
--cc=legion@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-api@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mkoutny@suse.com \
--cc=ran.xiaokai@zte.com.cn \
--cc=shuah@kernel.org \
--cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).