From: joeyli <jlee@suse.com>
To: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Cc: "Lee, Chun-Yi" <joeyli.kernel@gmail.com>,
"Rafael J . Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>,
Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>, Len Brown <len.brown@intel.com>,
"Martin K . Petersen" <martin.petersen@oracle.com>,
Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org>,
Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>,
Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@acm.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org,
Chen Yu <yu.c.chen@intel.com>,
Giovanni Gherdovich <ggherdovich@suse.cz>,
Jann Horn <jannh@google.com>, Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] PM / Sleep: Check the file capability when writing wake lock interface
Date: Mon, 31 Dec 2018 17:38:51 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20181231093851.GN3506@linux-l9pv.suse> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20181230144835.GB18985@kroah.com>
Hi Greg,
On Sun, Dec 30, 2018 at 03:48:35PM +0100, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 30, 2018 at 09:28:56PM +0800, Lee, Chun-Yi wrote:
> > The wake lock/unlock sysfs interfaces check that the writer must has
> > CAP_BLOCK_SUSPEND capability. But the checking logic can be bypassed
> > by opening sysfs file within an unprivileged process and then writing
> > the file within a privileged process. The tricking way has been exposed
> > by Andy Lutomirski in CVE-2013-1959.
>
> Don't you mean "open by privileged and then written by unprivileged?"
> Or if not, exactly how is this a problem? You check the capabilities
> when you do the write and if that is not allowed then, well
>
Sorry for I didn't provide clear explanation.
The privileged means CAP_BLOCK_SUSPEND but not file permission. The file permission
has already relaxed for non-root user. Then the expected behavior is that non-root
process must has CAP_BLOCK_SUSPEND capability for writing wake_lock sysfs.
But, the CAP_BLOCK_SUSPEND restrict can be bypassed:
int main(int argc, char* argv[])
{
int fd, ret = 0;
fd = open("/sys/power/wake_lock", O_RDWR);
if (fd < 0)
err(1, "open wake_lock");
if (dup2(fd, 1) != 1) // overwrite the stdout with wake_lock
err(1, "dup2");
sleep(1);
execl("./string", "string"); //string has capability
return ret;
}
This program is an unpriviledged process (has no CAP_BLOCK_SUSPEND), it opened
wake_lock sysfs and overwrited stdout. Then it executes the "string" program
that has CAP_BLOCK_SUSPEND. The string program writes to stdout, which means
that it writes to wake_lock. So an unpriviledged opener can trick an priviledged
writer for writing sysfs.
> And you are checking the namespace of the person trying to do the write
> when the write happens, which is correct here, right?
>
> If you really want to mess with wake locks in a namespaced environment,
> then put it in a real namespaced environment, which is {HUGE HINT} not
> sysfs.
>
I don't want to mess with wake locks in namespace.
> So no, this patch isn't ok...
>
Thanks a lot!
Joey Lee
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-12-31 9:39 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-12-30 13:28 [PATCH 0/2] [RFC] sysfs: Add hook for checking the file capability of opener Lee, Chun-Yi
2018-12-30 13:28 ` [PATCH 1/2] sysfs: Add hook for checking the file capable for opener Lee, Chun-Yi
2018-12-30 13:28 ` [PATCH 2/2] PM / Sleep: Check the file capability when writing wake lock interface Lee, Chun-Yi
2018-12-30 14:48 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2018-12-31 9:38 ` joeyli [this message]
2018-12-31 10:40 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2018-12-31 12:02 ` Jann Horn
2018-12-31 12:33 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2018-12-31 15:31 ` Andy Lutomirski
2018-12-30 14:45 ` [PATCH 0/2] [RFC] sysfs: Add hook for checking the file capability of opener Greg Kroah-Hartman
2018-12-31 9:41 ` joeyli
2018-12-31 10:38 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
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=20181231093851.GN3506@linux-l9pv.suse \
--to=jlee@suse.com \
--cc=bvanassche@acm.org \
--cc=ggherdovich@suse.cz \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=jannh@google.com \
--cc=joe@perches.com \
--cc=joeyli.kernel@gmail.com \
--cc=len.brown@intel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=luto@kernel.org \
--cc=martin.petersen@oracle.com \
--cc=pavel@ucw.cz \
--cc=rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com \
--cc=rdunlap@infradead.org \
--cc=yu.c.chen@intel.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).