From: Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@kernel.org>
To: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
Cc: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>,
Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>,
LSM List <linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org>,
James Morris <jmorris@namei.org>, Jann Horn <jannh@google.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@kernel.org>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>,
Network Development <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
bpf <bpf@vger.kernel.org>, kernel-team <kernel-team@fb.com>,
Linux API <linux-api@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next] bpf, capabilities: introduce CAP_BPF
Date: Thu, 3 Oct 2019 15:12:04 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20191003151204.5857bb24245f9c3355f27e0d@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <201909301129.5A1129C@keescook>
On Mon, 30 Sep 2019 11:31:29 -0700
Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org> wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 28, 2019 at 07:37:27PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> > On Wed, 28 Aug 2019 21:07:24 -0700
> > Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > This won’t make me much more comfortable, since CAP_BPF lets it do an ever-growing set of nasty things. I’d much rather one or both of two things happen:
> > > >
> > > > 1. Give it CAP_TRACING only. It can leak my data, but it’s rather hard for it to crash my laptop, lose data, or cause other shenanigans.
> > > >
> > > > 2. Improve it a bit do all the privileged ops are wrapped by capset().
> > > >
> > > > Does this make sense? I’m a security person on occasion. I find
> > > > vulnerabilities and exploit them deliberately and I break things by
> > > > accident on a regular basis. In my considered opinion, CAP_TRACING
> > > > alone, even extended to cover part of BPF as I’ve described, is
> > > > decently safe. Getting root with just CAP_TRACING will be decently
> > > > challenging, especially if I don’t get to read things like sshd’s
> > > > memory, and improvements to mitigate even that could be added. I
> > > > am quite confident that attacks starting with CAP_TRACING will have
> > > > clear audit signatures if auditing is on. I am also confident that
> > > > CAP_BPF *will* allow DoS and likely privilege escalation, and this
> > > > will only get more likely as BPF gets more widely used. And, if
> > > > BPF-based auditing ever becomes a thing, writing to the audit
> > > > daemon’s maps will be a great way to cover one’s tracks.
> > >
> > > CAP_TRACING, as I'm proposing it, will allow full tracefs access.
> > > I think Steven and Massami prefer that as well.
> > > That includes kprobe with probe_kernel_read.
> > > That also means mini-DoS by installing kprobes everywhere or running
> > > too much ftrace.
> >
> > I was talking with Kees at Plumbers about this, and we were talking
> > about just using simple file permissions. I started playing with some
> > patches to allow the tracefs be visible but by default it would only be
> > visible by root.
> >
> > rwx------
> >
> > Then a start up script (or perhaps mount options) could change the
> > group owner, and change this to:
> >
> > rwxrwx---
> >
> > Where anyone in the group assigned (say "tracing") gets full access to
> > the file system.
Does it for "all" files under tracefs?
> >
> > The more I was playing with this, the less I see the need for
> > CAP_TRACING for ftrace and reading the format files.
>
> Nice! Thanks for playing with this. I like it because it gives us a way
> to push policy into userspace (group membership, etc), and provides a
> clean way (hopefully) do separate "read" (kernel memory confidentiality)
> from "write" (kernel memory integrity), which wouldn't have been possible
> with a single new CAP_...
From the confidentiality point of view, if tracefs exposes traced data,
it might include in-kernel pointer and symbols, but the user still can't
see /proc/kallsyms. This means we still have several different confidentiality
for each interface.
Anyway, adding a tracefs mount option for allowing a user group to access
event format data will be a good idea. But even though, I think we still
need the CAP_TRACING for allowing control of intrusive tracing, like kprobes
and bpf etc. (Or, do we keep those for CAP_SYS_ADMIN??)
BTW, should we request CAP_SYS_PTRACE for ftrace uprobe interface too?
It might break any user-space program (including init) if user puts a
probe on a wrong address (e.g. non instruction boundary on x86).
Thank you,
--
Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@kernel.org>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-10-03 6:12 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 44+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <20190827205213.456318-1-ast@kernel.org>
2019-08-27 23:01 ` [PATCH bpf-next] bpf, capabilities: introduce CAP_BPF Andy Lutomirski
2019-08-27 23:21 ` Steven Rostedt
2019-08-27 23:34 ` Andy Lutomirski
2019-08-28 0:44 ` Steven Rostedt
2019-08-28 1:12 ` Andy Lutomirski
2019-08-28 2:22 ` Steven Rostedt
2019-08-28 0:38 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2019-08-28 3:30 ` Masami Hiramatsu
2019-08-28 4:47 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2019-08-28 0:34 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2019-08-28 0:55 ` Andy Lutomirski
2019-08-28 2:00 ` Andy Lutomirski
2019-08-28 4:49 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2019-08-28 6:20 ` Andy Lutomirski
2019-08-28 23:38 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2019-08-29 0:58 ` Andy Lutomirski
2019-08-28 4:43 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2019-08-28 6:12 ` Andy Lutomirski
2019-08-28 22:55 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2019-08-29 0:45 ` Andy Lutomirski
2019-08-29 0:53 ` Andy Lutomirski
2019-08-29 4:07 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2019-09-28 23:37 ` Steven Rostedt
2019-09-30 18:31 ` Kees Cook
2019-10-01 1:22 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2019-10-01 22:10 ` Steven Rostedt
2019-10-01 22:18 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2019-10-01 22:47 ` Steven Rostedt
2019-10-02 17:18 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2019-10-02 23:00 ` Steven Rostedt
2019-10-03 16:18 ` trace_printk issue. Was: " Alexei Starovoitov
2019-10-03 16:41 ` Steven Rostedt
2019-10-04 19:56 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2019-10-03 6:12 ` Masami Hiramatsu [this message]
2019-10-03 16:20 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2019-08-28 7:14 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-08-28 22:08 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2019-08-29 13:34 ` Steven Rostedt
2019-08-29 15:43 ` Andy Lutomirski
2019-08-29 17:23 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2019-08-29 17:36 ` Andy Lutomirski
2019-08-29 17:49 ` Steven Rostedt
2019-08-29 17:19 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2019-08-29 17:47 ` Steven Rostedt
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=20191003151204.5857bb24245f9c3355f27e0d@kernel.org \
--to=mhiramat@kernel.org \
--cc=alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=jannh@google.com \
--cc=jmorris@namei.org \
--cc=keescook@chromium.org \
--cc=kernel-team@fb.com \
--cc=linux-api@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=luto@amacapital.net \
--cc=luto@kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.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).