All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Matthew Bobrowski <repnop@google.com>
To: Amir Goldstein <amir73il@gmail.com>
Cc: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>,
	Matthew Bobrowski <mbobrowski@mbobrowski.org>,
	linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] fanotify: fix permission model of unprivileged group
Date: Mon, 24 May 2021 18:41:36 +1000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <YKtmwOM9WqUTK/u4@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210522091916.196741-1-amir73il@gmail.com>

On Sat, May 22, 2021 at 12:19:16PM +0300, Amir Goldstein wrote:
> Reporting event->pid should depend on the privileges of the user that
> initialized the group, not the privileges of the user reading the
> events.
> 
> Use an internal group flag FANOTIFY_UNPRIV to record the fact the the
> group was initialized by an unprivileged user.
> 
> To be on the safe side, the premissions to setup filesystem and mount
> marks now require that both the user that initialized the group and
> the user setting up the mark have CAP_SYS_ADMIN.
> 
> Fixes: 7cea2a3c505e ("fanotify: support limited functionality for unprivileged users")
> Signed-off-by: Amir Goldstein <amir73il@gmail.com>

Thanks for sending through this patch Amir!

In general, the patch looks good to me, however there's just a few
nits below.

> diff --git a/fs/notify/fanotify/fanotify_user.c b/fs/notify/fanotify/fanotify_user.c
> index 71fefb30e015..7df6cba4a06d 100644
> --- a/fs/notify/fanotify/fanotify_user.c
> +++ b/fs/notify/fanotify/fanotify_user.c
> @@ -424,11 +424,18 @@ static ssize_t copy_event_to_user(struct fsnotify_group *group,
>  	 * events generated by the listener process itself, without disclosing
>  	 * the pids of other processes.
>  	 */
> -	if (!capable(CAP_SYS_ADMIN) &&
> +	if (FAN_GROUP_FLAG(group, FANOTIFY_UNPRIV) &&
>  	    task_tgid(current) != event->pid)
>  		metadata.pid = 0;
>  
> -	if (path && path->mnt && path->dentry) {
> +	/*
> +	 * For now, we require fid mode for unprivileged listener, which does
> +	 * record path events, but keep this check for safety in case we want
> +	 * to allow unprivileged listener to get events with no fd and no fid
> +	 * in the future.
> +	 */

I think it's best if we keep clear of using first person in our
comments throughout our code base. Maybe we could change this to:

* For now, fid mode is required for an unprivileged listener, which
  does record path events. However, this check must be kept...

> +	if (!FAN_GROUP_FLAG(group, FANOTIFY_UNPRIV) &&
> +	    path && path->mnt && path->dentry) {
>  		fd = create_fd(group, path, &f);
>  		if (fd < 0)
>  			return fd;
> @@ -1040,6 +1047,7 @@ SYSCALL_DEFINE2(fanotify_init, unsigned int, flags, unsigned int, event_f_flags)
>  	int f_flags, fd;
>  	unsigned int fid_mode = flags & FANOTIFY_FID_BITS;
>  	unsigned int class = flags & FANOTIFY_CLASS_BITS;
> +	unsigned int internal_flags = 0;
>  
>  	pr_debug("%s: flags=%x event_f_flags=%x\n",
>  		 __func__, flags, event_f_flags);
> @@ -1053,6 +1061,13 @@ SYSCALL_DEFINE2(fanotify_init, unsigned int, flags, unsigned int, event_f_flags)
>  		 */
>  		if ((flags & FANOTIFY_ADMIN_INIT_FLAGS) || !fid_mode)
>  			return -EPERM;
> +
> +		/*
> +		 * We set the internal flag FANOTIFY_UNPRIV on the group, so we
> +		 * know that we need to limit setting mount/filesystem marks on
> +		 * this group and avoid providing pid and open fd in the event.
> +		 */

Same comment as above applies here. This could be changed to:

* Set the internal FANOTIFY_UNPRIV flag for this notification group so
  that certain restrictions can be enforced upon it. This includes
  things like not permitting an unprivileged user from setting up
  mount/filesystem scoped marks and not returning an open file
  descriptor or pid meta-information within an event.

You can make it shorter if you like, but you get the drift.

> +		internal_flags |= FANOTIFY_UNPRIV;
>  	}
>  
>  #ifdef CONFIG_AUDITSYSCALL
> @@ -1105,7 +1120,7 @@ SYSCALL_DEFINE2(fanotify_init, unsigned int, flags, unsigned int, event_f_flags)
>  		goto out_destroy_group;
>  	}
>  
> -	group->fanotify_data.flags = flags;
> +	group->fanotify_data.flags = flags | internal_flags;
>  	group->memcg = get_mem_cgroup_from_mm(current->mm);
>  
>  	group->fanotify_data.merge_hash = fanotify_alloc_merge_hash();
> @@ -1305,11 +1320,13 @@ static int do_fanotify_mark(int fanotify_fd, unsigned int flags, __u64 mask,
>  	group = f.file->private_data;
>  
>  	/*
> -	 * An unprivileged user is not allowed to watch a mount point nor
> -	 * a filesystem.
> +	 * An unprivileged user is not allowed to setup mount point nor
  	      		   	       	       	  	      	   ^
								   s
> +	 * filesystem marks. It is not allowed to setup those marks for
> +	 * a group that was initialized by an unprivileged user.

I think the second sentence would better read as:

       * This also includes setting up such marks by a group that was
         intialized by an unprivileged user.

>  	ret = -EPERM;
> -	if (!capable(CAP_SYS_ADMIN) &&
> +	if ((!capable(CAP_SYS_ADMIN) ||
> +	     FAN_GROUP_FLAG(group, FANOTIFY_UNPRIV)) &&

...

> diff --git a/fs/notify/fdinfo.c b/fs/notify/fdinfo.c
> index a712b2aaa9ac..57f0d5d9f934 100644
> --- a/fs/notify/fdinfo.c
> +++ b/fs/notify/fdinfo.c
> @@ -144,7 +144,7 @@ void fanotify_show_fdinfo(struct seq_file *m, struct file *f)
>  	struct fsnotify_group *group = f->private_data;
>  
>  	seq_printf(m, "fanotify flags:%x event-flags:%x\n",
> -		   group->fanotify_data.flags,
> +		   group->fanotify_data.flags & FANOTIFY_INIT_FLAGS,
>  		   group->fanotify_data.f_flags);

I feel like the internal initialization flags have been dropped off
here as FANOTIFY_INIT_FLAGS technically wouldn't cover all flags
present in group->fanotify_data.flags with FANOTIFY_UNPRIV, right?

>  	show_fdinfo(m, f, fanotify_fdinfo);
> diff --git a/include/linux/fanotify.h b/include/linux/fanotify.h
> index bad41bcb25df..f277d1c4e6b8 100644
> --- a/include/linux/fanotify.h
> +++ b/include/linux/fanotify.h
> @@ -51,6 +51,10 @@ extern struct ctl_table fanotify_table[]; /* for sysctl */
>  #define FANOTIFY_INIT_FLAGS	(FANOTIFY_ADMIN_INIT_FLAGS | \
>  				 FANOTIFY_USER_INIT_FLAGS)
>  
> +/* Internal flags */
> +#define FANOTIFY_UNPRIV		0x80000000
> +#define FANOTIFY_INTERNAL_FLAGS	(FANOTIFY_UNPRIV)

Should we be more distinct here i.e. FANOTIFY_INTERNAL_INIT_FLAGS?
Just thinking about a possible case where there's some other internal
fanotify flags that are used for something else?

>  #define FANOTIFY_MARK_TYPE_BITS	(FAN_MARK_INODE | FAN_MARK_MOUNT | \
>  				 FAN_MARK_FILESYSTEM)

/M

  reply	other threads:[~2021-05-24  8:41 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-05-22  9:19 [PATCH] fanotify: fix permission model of unprivileged group Amir Goldstein
2021-05-24  8:41 ` Matthew Bobrowski [this message]
2021-05-24 10:00   ` Jan Kara
2021-05-24 23:42     ` Matthew Bobrowski
2021-05-24 10:40   ` Amir Goldstein
2021-05-24 10:02 ` Jan Kara

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=YKtmwOM9WqUTK/u4@google.com \
    --to=repnop@google.com \
    --cc=amir73il@gmail.com \
    --cc=jack@suse.cz \
    --cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mbobrowski@mbobrowski.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.