Re: [PATCH 3/9] proc: use open()-time creds for ptrace checks

From: Jann Horn <jann@thejh.net>
To: Stephen Smalley <sds@tycho.nsa.gov>
Cc: Alexander Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
	Roland McGrath <roland@hack.frob.com>,
	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>,
	John Johansen <john.johansen@canonical.com>,
	James Morris <james.l.morris@oracle.com>,
	"Serge E. Hallyn" <serge@hallyn.com>,
	Paul Moore <aul@paul-moore.com>,
	Eric Paris <eparis@parisplace.org>,
	Casey Schaufler <casey@schaufler-ca.com>,
	Kees Cook <eescook@chromium.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	Janis Danisevskis <jdanis@google.com>,
	Seth Forshee <seth.forshee@canonical.com>,
	"Eric . Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	Benjamin LaHaise <bcrl@kvack.org>,
	linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org, security@kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/9] proc: use open()-time creds for ptrace checks
Date: Mon, 19 Sep 2016 16:32:07 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160919143206.GC2903@pc.thejh.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4f10ddba-fb7c-04a3-0426-550b435e6f3a@tycho.nsa.gov>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2054 bytes --]

On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 09:01:19AM -0400, Stephen Smalley wrote:
> On 09/18/2016 11:05 AM, Jann Horn wrote:
> > This adds a new ptrace_may_access_noncurrent() method that
> > uses the supplied credentials instead of those of the
> > current task. (However, the current task may still be
> > inspected for auditing purposes, e.g. by the Smack LSM.)
> > 
> > procfs used the caller's creds for a few ptrace_may_access()
> > checks at read() time, which made a confused deputy attack
> > by passing an FD to a procfs file to a setuid program
> > possible. Therefore, the following was a local userspace
> > ASLR bypass:
[...]
> > diff --git a/security/selinux/hooks.c b/security/selinux/hooks.c
> > index 13185a6..f9a0be7 100644
> > --- a/security/selinux/hooks.c
> > +++ b/security/selinux/hooks.c
> > @@ -2133,10 +2133,10 @@ static int selinux_binder_transfer_file(struct task_struct *from,
> >  }
> >  
> >  static int selinux_ptrace_access_check(struct task_struct *child,
> > -				     unsigned int mode)
> > +				     unsigned int mode, const struct cred *cred)
> >  {
> >  	if (mode & PTRACE_MODE_READ) {
> > -		u32 sid = current_sid();
> > +		u32 sid = cred_sid(cred);
> >  		u32 csid = task_sid(child);
> >  		return avc_has_perm(sid, csid, SECCLASS_FILE, FILE__READ, NULL);
> >  	}
> 
> For consistency, don't you also need to change the next line of code to
> use cred_has_perm() rather than current_has_perm()?

Oh, right.

How about something like this?

  u32 sid = cred_sid(cred);
  u32 csid = task_sid(child);
  if (mode & PTRACE_MODE_READ)
    return avc_has_perm(sid, csid, SECCLASS_FILE, FILE__READ, NULL);
  else
    return avc_has_perm(sid, csid, SECCLASS_PROCESS, PROCESS__PTRACE, NULL);

The current code looks as if the PTRACE_MODE_READ and PTRACE_MODE_ATTACH cases
behave very differently, which they actually don't. And to be able to use
cred_has_perm() here, it would be necessary to explicitly grab and release
an RCU read lock or so (to prevent the child creds from going away).

[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 819 bytes --]