From: Aleksa Sarai <cyphar@cyphar.com>
To: Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net>
Cc: Jann Horn <jannh@google.com>, Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>,
Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
Jeff Layton <jlayton@kernel.org>,
"J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@fieldses.org>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>,
Eric Biederman <ebiederm@xmission.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>,
Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>,
Christian Brauner <christian@brauner.io>,
Tycho Andersen <tycho@tycho.ws>,
David Drysdale <drysdale@google.com>,
Chanho Min <chanho.min@lge.com>, Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>,
Aleksa Sarai <asarai@suse.de>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
Linux Containers <containers@lists.linux-foundation.org>,
linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
Linux API <linux-api@vger.kernel.org>,
kernel list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-arch <linux-arch@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 5/6] binfmt_*: scope path resolution of interpreters
Date: Sun, 12 May 2019 03:26:04 +1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190511172604.znr7wa3iarlgzor4@yavin> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <C60DC580-854D-478D-AF23-5F29FB7C3E50@amacapital.net>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3017 bytes --]
On 2019-05-11, Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net> wrote:
> >> I've lost track of the context here, but it seems to me that
> >> mitigating attacks involving accidental following of /proc links
> >> shouldn't depend on dumpability. What's the actual problem this is
> >> trying to solve again?
> >
> > The one actual security problem that I've seen related to this is
> > CVE-2019-5736. There is a write-up of it at
> > <https://blog.dragonsector.pl/2019/02/cve-2019-5736-escape-from-docker-and.html>
> > under "Successful approach", but it goes more or less as follows:
> >
> > A container is running that doesn't use user namespaces (because for
> > some reason I don't understand, apparently some people still do that).
> > An evil process is running inside the container with UID 0 (as in,
> > GLOBAL_ROOT_UID); so if the evil process inside the container was able
> > to reach root-owned files on the host filesystem, it could write into
> > them.
> >
> > The container engine wants to spawn a new process inside the container.
> > It forks off a child that joins the container's namespaces (including
> > PID and mount namespaces), and then the child calls execve() on some
> > path in the container.
>
> I think that, at this point, the task should be considered owned by
> the container. Maybe we should have a better API than execve() to
> execute a program in a safer way, but fiddling with dumpability seems
> like a band-aid. In fact, the process is arguably pwned even *before*
> execve.
Yeah, execve is just the vector (though in this case it's done in order
to clear mm->dumpable). An earlier CVE (CVE-2016-9962) was very similar
but was attacking a dirfd that runc had open into the container (LXC had
a very similar bug too) -- setting !mm->dumpable was one of the
workarounds we had for this.
> A better “spawn” API should fix this. In the mean time, I think it
> should be assumed that, if you join a container’s namespaces, you are
> at its mercy.
This is generally how we treat containers as runtime authors, but it's
not a trivial thing to get right. In many cases the kernel APIs are
working against you -- Christian and myself have written a fair few
patches to fix holes in the kernel APIs so we can avoid these kinds of
assumptions.
But yes, one of the most risky parts of a container runtime is when
you're attaching to a running container because all of the helpful
introspection APIs in /proc/ suddenly become a security nightmare. A
better "spawn a process in these namespaces" API might help improve the
situation (or at least, I hope it would).
> > - You can use /proc/*/exe to get a writable fd.
>
> This is IMO the real bug.
I will try to send an RFC of the patchset I have for this next week or
so. Funnily enough, currently /proc/*/exe has the write bit set in its
"mode" (my series fixes this).
--
Aleksa Sarai
Senior Software Engineer (Containers)
SUSE Linux GmbH
<https://www.cyphar.com/>
[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-05-11 17:26 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 32+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-05-06 16:54 [PATCH v6 0/6] namei: resolveat(2) path resolution restriction API Aleksa Sarai
2019-05-06 16:54 ` [PATCH v6 1/6] namei: split out nd->dfd handling to dirfd_path_init Aleksa Sarai
2019-05-06 16:54 ` [PATCH v6 2/6] namei: O_BENEATH-style path resolution flags Aleksa Sarai
2019-05-06 16:54 ` [PATCH v6 3/6] namei: LOOKUP_IN_ROOT: chroot-like path resolution Aleksa Sarai
2019-05-06 16:54 ` [PATCH v6 4/6] namei: aggressively check for nd->root escape on ".." resolution Aleksa Sarai
2019-05-06 16:54 ` [PATCH v6 5/6] binfmt_*: scope path resolution of interpreters Aleksa Sarai
2019-05-06 18:37 ` Jann Horn
2019-05-06 19:17 ` Aleksa Sarai
2019-05-06 23:41 ` Andy Lutomirski
2019-05-08 0:54 ` Aleksa Sarai
2019-05-10 20:41 ` Jann Horn
2019-05-10 21:20 ` Andy Lutomirski
2019-05-10 22:55 ` Jann Horn
2019-05-10 23:36 ` Christian Brauner
2019-05-11 15:49 ` Aleksa Sarai
2019-05-11 17:00 ` Andy Lutomirski
2019-05-11 17:21 ` Linus Torvalds
2019-05-11 17:26 ` Linus Torvalds
2019-05-11 17:31 ` Aleksa Sarai
2019-05-11 17:43 ` Linus Torvalds
2019-05-11 17:48 ` Christian Brauner
2019-05-11 18:00 ` Aleksa Sarai
2019-05-11 22:39 ` Andy Lutomirski
[not found] ` <CAHk-=wg3+3GfHsHdB4o78jNiPh_5ShrzxBuTN-Y8EZfiFMhCvw@mail.gmail.com>
2019-05-12 10:19 ` Christian Brauner
[not found] ` <9CD2B97D-A6BD-43BE-9040-B410D996A195@amacapital.net>
2019-05-12 10:44 ` Linus Torvalds
2019-05-12 13:35 ` Aleksa Sarai
2019-05-12 13:38 ` Aleksa Sarai
2019-05-12 14:34 ` Andy Lutomirski
2019-05-11 17:26 ` Aleksa Sarai [this message]
2019-05-08 0:38 ` Eric W. Biederman
2019-05-10 20:10 ` Jann Horn
2019-05-06 16:54 ` [PATCH v6 6/6] namei: resolveat(2) syscall Aleksa Sarai
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=20190511172604.znr7wa3iarlgzor4@yavin \
--to=cyphar@cyphar.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=arnd@arndb.de \
--cc=asarai@suse.de \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=bfields@fieldses.org \
--cc=chanho.min@lge.com \
--cc=christian@brauner.io \
--cc=containers@lists.linux-foundation.org \
--cc=dhowells@redhat.com \
--cc=drysdale@google.com \
--cc=ebiederm@xmission.com \
--cc=jannh@google.com \
--cc=jlayton@kernel.org \
--cc=keescook@chromium.org \
--cc=linux-api@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-arch@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=luto@amacapital.net \
--cc=luto@kernel.org \
--cc=oleg@redhat.com \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=tycho@tycho.ws \
--cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
/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).