All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Vasily Averin <vvs@odin.com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>,
	Josh Boyer <jwboyer@redhat.com>, Eric Paris <eparis@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] kernel/printk/printk.c: check_syslog_permissions() cleanup
Date: Fri, 15 May 2015 10:41:50 +0300	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <5555A33E.5070403@odin.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20150514150154.dbfb8ab275aa30d0fe93172b@linux-foundation.org>

On 15.05.2015 01:01, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Sun, 10 May 2015 09:35:53 +0300 Vasily Averin <vvs@odin.com> wrote:
> 
>> Fixes: 637241a900cb ("kmsg: honor dmesg_restrict sysctl on /dev/kmsg")
>>
>> Final version of patch 637241a900cb ("kmsg: honor dmesg_restrict sysctl
>> on /dev/kmsg") lost few hooks. As result security_syslog() is not checked
>> inside check_syslog_permissions() if dmesg_restrict is set,
>> or it can be called twice in do_syslog().
> 
> I'm not seeing how security_syslog() is called twice from do_syslog(). 
> Put more details in the changelog, please.

For example, if dmesg_restrict is not set and SYSLOG_ACTION_OPEN is requested.
In this case do_syslog() calls check_syslog_permissions() 
where security_syslog() is called first time and approves the operation,
then do_syslog() itself calls security_syslog() 2nd time.

>> --- a/kernel/printk/printk.c
>> +++ b/kernel/printk/printk.c
>> @@ -484,11 +484,11 @@ int check_syslog_permissions(int type, bool from_file)
>>  	 * already done the capabilities checks at open time.
>>  	 */
>>  	if (from_file && type != SYSLOG_ACTION_OPEN)
>> -		return 0;
>> +		goto ok;
> 
> This seems wrong - we should only call security_syslog() for opens?

Are you sure?
I saw Linus comment in thread related to old patch, 
and I agree that usual kernel checks can be skipped.

However I believe security hooks should be called anyway,
in general case they can have own rules about access, logging
or additional things that should be called before execution of requested operation.

Am I wrong?

  reply	other threads:[~2015-05-15  7:42 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-05-10  6:35 [PATCH] kernel/printk/printk.c: check_syslog_permissions() cleanup Vasily Averin
2015-05-14 22:01 ` Andrew Morton
2015-05-15  7:41   ` Vasily Averin [this message]
2015-05-15  9:22     ` Vasily Averin
2015-05-24 16:09   ` Vasily Averin
2015-05-24 16:18   ` [PATCH v2] security_syslog() should be called once only Vasily Averin
2015-05-27 23:43     ` Andrew Morton
2015-05-30 13:51       ` Vasily Averin
2015-06-01 21:23         ` Andrew Morton
2015-06-02  7:57           ` Vasily Averin
2015-05-30 13:51       ` [PATCH] check_syslog_permissions() cleanup Vasily Averin
2015-06-04 17:00       ` [PATCH v2] security_syslog() should be called once only Kees Cook

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=5555A33E.5070403@odin.com \
    --to=vvs@odin.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=eparis@redhat.com \
    --cc=jwboyer@redhat.com \
    --cc=keescook@chromium.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.