From: Matt Brown <matt@nmatt.com>
To: Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Cc: serge@hallyn.com, jslaby@suse.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org,
jannh@google.com, keescook@chromium.org, jmorris@namei.org,
kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com,
linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [kernel-hardening] Re: [PATCH v6 2/2] security: tty: make TIOCSTI ioctl require CAP_SYS_ADMIN
Date: Fri, 19 May 2017 00:51:29 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <9a633fdc-c260-d9e2-14ed-6911b6950ec0@nmatt.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170518133126.GA29952@kroah.com>
On 5/18/17 9:31 AM, Greg KH wrote:
> On Fri, May 05, 2017 at 07:20:18PM -0400, Matt Brown wrote:
>> This introduces the tiocsti_restrict sysctl, whose default is controlled via
>> CONFIG_SECURITY_TIOCSTI_RESTRICT. When activated, this control restricts
>> all TIOCSTI ioctl calls from non CAP_SYS_ADMIN users.
>>
>> This patch depends on patch 1/2
>>
>> This patch was inspired from GRKERNSEC_HARDEN_TTY.
>>
>> This patch would have prevented
>> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1411256 under the following
>> conditions:
>> * non-privileged container
>> * container run inside new user namespace
>>
>> Possible effects on userland:
>>
>> There could be a few user programs that would be effected by this
>> change.
>> See: <https://codesearch.debian.net/search?q=ioctl%5C%28.*TIOCSTI>
>> notable programs are: agetty, csh, xemacs and tcsh
>>
>> However, I still believe that this change is worth it given that the
>> Kconfig defaults to n. This will be a feature that is turned on for the
>> same reason that people activate it when using grsecurity. Users of this
>> opt-in feature will realize that they are choosing security over some OS
>> features like unprivileged TIOCSTI ioctls, as should be clear in the
>> Kconfig help message.
>>
>> Threat Model/Patch Rational:
>>
>> >From grsecurity's config for GRKERNSEC_HARDEN_TTY.
>>
>> | There are very few legitimate uses for this functionality and it
>> | has made vulnerabilities in several 'su'-like programs possible in
>> | the past. Even without these vulnerabilities, it provides an
>> | attacker with an easy mechanism to move laterally among other
>> | processes within the same user's compromised session.
>>
>> So if one process within a tty session becomes compromised it can follow
>> that additional processes, that are thought to be in different security
>> boundaries, can be compromised as a result. When using a program like su
>> or sudo, these additional processes could be in a tty session where TTY file
>> descriptors are indeed shared over privilege boundaries.
>>
>> This is also an excellent writeup about the issue:
>> <http://www.halfdog.net/Security/2012/TtyPushbackPrivilegeEscalation/>
>>
>> When user namespaces are in use, the check for the capability
>> CAP_SYS_ADMIN is done against the user namespace that originally opened
>> the tty.
>>
>> Acked-by: Serge Hallyn <serge@hallyn.com>
>> Reviewed-by: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
>> Signed-off-by: Matt Brown <matt@nmatt.com>
>> ---
>> Documentation/sysctl/kernel.txt | 21 +++++++++++++++++++++
>> drivers/tty/tty_io.c | 6 ++++++
>> include/linux/tty.h | 2 ++
>> kernel/sysctl.c | 12 ++++++++++++
>> security/Kconfig | 13 +++++++++++++
>> 5 files changed, 54 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/Documentation/sysctl/kernel.txt b/Documentation/sysctl/kernel.txt
>> index bac23c1..f7985cf 100644
>> --- a/Documentation/sysctl/kernel.txt
>> +++ b/Documentation/sysctl/kernel.txt
>> @@ -89,6 +89,7 @@ show up in /proc/sys/kernel:
>> - sysctl_writes_strict
>> - tainted
>> - threads-max
>> +- tiocsti_restrict
>> - unknown_nmi_panic
>> - watchdog
>> - watchdog_thresh
>> @@ -987,6 +988,26 @@ available RAM pages threads-max is reduced accordingly.
>>
>> ==============================================================
>>
>> +tiocsti_restrict:
>> +
>> +This toggle indicates whether unprivileged users are prevented
>> +from using the TIOCSTI ioctl to inject commands into other processes
>> +which share a tty session.
>> +
>> +When tiocsti_restrict is set to (0) there are no restrictions(accept
>> +the default restriction of only being able to injection commands into
>> +one's own tty). When tiocsti_restrict is set to (1), users must
>> +have CAP_SYS_ADMIN to use the TIOCSTI ioctl.
>> +
>> +When user namespaces are in use, the check for the capability
>> +CAP_SYS_ADMIN is done against the user namespace that originally
>> +opened the tty.
>> +
>> +The kernel config option CONFIG_SECURITY_TIOCSTI_RESTRICT sets the
>> +default value of tiocsti_restrict.
>> +
>> +==============================================================
>> +
>> unknown_nmi_panic:
>>
>> The value in this file affects behavior of handling NMI. When the
>> diff --git a/drivers/tty/tty_io.c b/drivers/tty/tty_io.c
>> index c276814..fe68d14 100644
>> --- a/drivers/tty/tty_io.c
>> +++ b/drivers/tty/tty_io.c
>> @@ -2297,11 +2297,17 @@ static int tty_fasync(int fd, struct file *filp, int on)
>> * FIXME: may race normal receive processing
>> */
>>
>> +int tiocsti_restrict = IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_SECURITY_TIOCSTI_RESTRICT);
>> +
>> static int tiocsti(struct tty_struct *tty, char __user *p)
>> {
>> char ch, mbz = 0;
>> struct tty_ldisc *ld;
>>
>> + if (tiocsti_restrict && !ns_capable(tty->owner_user_ns,CAP_SYS_ADMIN)) {
>> + pr_warn_ratelimited("TIOCSTI ioctl call blocked for non-privileged process\n");
>> + return -EPERM;
>
> Always follow the proper kernel coding style rules, as I don't want to
> have someone else have to come along and fix up the error you have added
> here :(
>
> checkpatch.pl is your friend, really...
>
My bad. Will fix these issues in v7.
> And why not do a warning with the device that caused the problem to
> happen? dev_warn has a ratelimit I think right? "raw" printk messages
> like this don't help in trying to track down what/who caused the issue.
>
yes <linux/device.h> has dev_warn_ratelimited. I will use that in 7v.
> And finally, can userspace see the namespace for the tty? Doesn't
> things like checkpoint/restore need that in order to properly set the
> tty connection back up when moving processes?
This seems like we would need to expose the owner_user_ns of the tty in procfs
somewhere. Section 1.7 Documentation/filesystems/proc.txt describes the
following files in /proc/tty:
Table 1-11: Files in /proc/tty
..............................................................................
File Content
drivers list of drivers and their usage
ldiscs registered line disciplines
driver/serial usage statistic and status of single tty lines
..............................................................................
The drivers file is the one that gives the most information that we are
interested in.
However, the current layout combines information about multiple ttys by driver.
As I understand it, a single driver may have ttys that span across different
owner_user_ns. would it make sense to add a file /proc/tty/ns that would
contain the different tty to user namespace mappings? Or is there a better way
to do this? I would appreciate any feedback/ideas you have on this.
>
> v7? :)
v7 will be on its way soon. I'm not currently sure how to address the concern
of giving things like checkpoint/restore in userland a way to get the
owner_user_ns.
>
> thanks,
>
> greg k-h
>
Thanks for the feedback,
Matt Brown
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-05-19 4:51 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 32+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-05-05 23:20 [kernel-hardening] [PATCH v6 0/2] security: tty: make TIOCSTI ioctl require CAP_SYS_ADMIN Matt Brown
2017-05-05 23:20 ` [kernel-hardening] [PATCH v6 1/2] security: tty: Add owner user namespace to tty_struct Matt Brown
2017-05-05 23:20 ` [kernel-hardening] [PATCH v6 2/2] security: tty: make TIOCSTI ioctl require CAP_SYS_ADMIN Matt Brown
2017-05-18 13:31 ` [kernel-hardening] " Greg KH
2017-05-19 4:51 ` Matt Brown [this message]
2017-05-10 20:29 ` [kernel-hardening] Re: [PATCH v6 0/2] " Alan Cox
2017-05-10 21:02 ` Daniel Micay
2017-05-13 19:52 ` Matt Brown
2017-05-15 4:45 ` Nicolas Belouin
2017-05-15 20:57 ` Alan Cox
2017-05-15 23:10 ` Peter Dolding
2017-05-16 4:15 ` Matt Brown
2017-05-16 9:01 ` Peter Dolding
2017-05-16 12:22 ` Matt Brown
2017-05-16 14:28 ` Kees Cook
2017-05-16 15:48 ` Serge E. Hallyn
2017-05-16 22:05 ` Peter Dolding
2017-05-16 21:43 ` Peter Dolding
2017-05-16 21:54 ` Matt Brown
2017-05-17 16:41 ` Alan Cox
2017-05-17 18:25 ` Daniel Micay
2017-05-17 23:04 ` Boris Lukashev
2017-05-18 3:18 ` Kees Cook
2017-05-19 2:48 ` Peter Dolding
2017-05-19 4:08 ` Boris Lukashev
2017-05-19 14:33 ` Serge E. Hallyn
2017-05-29 10:42 ` Peter Dolding
2017-05-30 15:52 ` Serge E. Hallyn
2017-05-30 21:52 ` Alan Cox
2017-05-31 11:27 ` Peter Dolding
2017-05-31 14:36 ` Alan Cox
2017-05-31 15:32 ` Serge E. Hallyn
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=9a633fdc-c260-d9e2-14ed-6911b6950ec0@nmatt.com \
--to=matt@nmatt.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=jannh@google.com \
--cc=jmorris@namei.org \
--cc=jslaby@suse.com \
--cc=keescook@chromium.org \
--cc=kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=serge@hallyn.com \
/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).