From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
        id S1756024AbdLVCRo (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
        Thu, 21 Dec 2017 21:17:44 -0500
Received: from mx2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:39310 "EHLO mx2.suse.de"
        rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
        id S1754859AbdLVCRn (ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
        Thu, 21 Dec 2017 21:17:43 -0500
Date: Fri, 22 Dec 2017 13:17:34 +1100
From: Aleksa Sarai <asarai@suse.de>
To: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>
Cc: Maciej =?utf-8?Q?=C5=BBenczykowski?= <zenczykowski@gmail.com>,
        Linux Containers <containers@lists.linux-foundation.org>,
        linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org,
        Mahesh Bandewar <maheshb@google.com>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Willem de Bruijn <willemb@google.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] userns: honour no_new_privs for cap_bset during user ns
 creation/switch
Message-ID: <20171222021733.rerkt6mhpf3cb3oe@gordon>
References: <20171221210605.181720-1-zenczykowski@gmail.com>
 <87wp1foiwa.fsf@xmission.com>
 <CAHo-OoyrOr5jXwU-j4Z4qYdWo40+qAdAk0r+OpfMUZ6LgbS-RA@mail.gmail.com>
 <87fu83lfw5.fsf@xmission.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256;
        protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="kwekmczu27otmcjx"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <87fu83lfw5.fsf@xmission.com>
User-Agent: NeoMutt/20170912 (1.9.0)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org


--kwekmczu27otmcjx
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On 2017-12-21, Eric W. Biederman <ebiederm@xmission.com> wrote:
> Good point about CAP_DAC_OVERRIDE on files you own.
>=20
> I think there is an argument that you are playing dangerous games with
> the permission system there, as it isn't effectively a file you own if
> you can't read it, and you can't change it's permissions.

This problem reminds me of the whole "unmapped group" problem. If you
have access to a file through an unmapped group you can still access a
file -- which to me is wrong. I understand the need for checking
unmapped groups in order to fix the "chmod 707" problem, but I think
that unmapped groups should only *block* access and never *grant* it.

I was working on a patch for that issue a while ago but it touched more
VFS than I was comfortable with. Eric, is that a fix you would be
interested in?

--=20
Aleksa Sarai
Senior Software Engineer (Containers)
SUSE Linux GmbH
<https://www.cyphar.com/>

--kwekmczu27otmcjx
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
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=i2Hp
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--kwekmczu27otmcjx--