From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
To: Ric Wheeler <ricwheeler@gmail.com>
Cc: axboe@kernel.dk, Mike Snitzer <snitzer@redhat.com>,
Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
"Martin K. Petersen" <martin.petersen@oracle.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [Ping^3] Re: [PATCH] sg_io: allow UNMAP and WRITE SAME without CAP_SYS_RAWIO
Date: Thu, 06 Sep 2012 14:36:53 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <504898E5.1070507@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5048922C.20901@gmail.com>
Il 06/09/2012 14:08, Ric Wheeler ha scritto:
>> According to the standard, the translation layer can write a
>> user-provided pattern to every sector in the disk. It's an optional
>> feature and libata doesn't do that, but it is still possible.
>
> It is not possible today with our stack though, any patch that would
> change that would also need to be vetted.
It is not possible with SATA disks, but native SCSI disks might well
interpret FORMAT UNIT destructively.
>>> I don't see allowing anyone who can open the device to zero the data as
>>> better though :)
>> Note: anyone who can open it for writing! And they can just as well
>> issue WRITE, it just takes a little more effort than with WRITE SAME. :)
>> If you only have read access, you cannot issue WRITE or FORMAT UNIT,
>> and with this patch you will not be able to issue WRITE SAME.
>
> This just seems like an argument over whether or not capabilities make
> sense. In general, anything as destructive as a single CDB that can kill
> all of your data should be tightly controlled.
In practice, a single write to the first MB of the disk is just as
destructive. For that you do not even need a SCSI command.
> Pushing more code in the data path is not where we are going - we
> routinely need to disable IO scheduling for example when driving IO to
> high speed/low latency devices and are actively looking at how to tackle
> other performance bottlenecks in the stack.
I am not talking about the regular data path, only of SG_IO.
> I don't see a strong reason that our existing scheme (root or
> CAP_SYS_RAWIO access) prevents you from doing what you need to do.
Here are three:
- CAP_SYS_RAWIO partly bypasses DAC; you can issue destructive commands
even if you only opened the disk for reading. CAP_SYS_RAWIO also gives
access to _really_ destructive commands (WRITE BUFFER and PERSISTENT
RESERVE OUT for example).
- CAP_SYS_RAWIO lets you send SCSI commands to partitions, and they will
gladly read/write the disk going outside the boundaries of the
partition. Changing this behavior was rejected upstream already.
- CAP_SYS_RAWIO also gives access to I/O ports, mmap at address 0, and
too many other insecure things.
All the above mean that:
- any application using CAP_SYS_RAWIO would have to implement its own
whitelisting, even if just to duplicate what is done in the kernel;
- exploiting a CAP_SYS_RAWIO process leads to root too easily, and it is
not possible to give the capability to anything that will run in a
hostile environment (in my case QEMU).
Paolo
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-09-06 12:37 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-07-20 16:30 [PATCH] sg_io: allow UNMAP and WRITE SAME without CAP_SYS_RAWIO Paolo Bonzini
2012-08-01 15:53 ` Paolo Bonzini
2012-08-28 11:04 ` Paolo Bonzini
2012-09-05 14:41 ` [Ping^3] " Paolo Bonzini
2012-09-05 20:18 ` Ric Wheeler
2012-09-06 6:31 ` Paolo Bonzini
2012-09-06 11:31 ` Ric Wheeler
2012-09-06 11:49 ` Paolo Bonzini
2012-09-06 12:08 ` Ric Wheeler
2012-09-06 12:36 ` Paolo Bonzini [this message]
2012-09-06 14:20 ` Lukáš Czerner
2012-09-11 16:59 ` Tejun Heo
2012-09-11 17:56 ` Paolo Bonzini
2012-09-11 18:29 ` Tejun Heo
2012-09-11 18:54 ` Paolo Bonzini
2012-09-11 19:13 ` Tejun Heo
2012-09-11 19:24 ` Paolo Bonzini
2012-09-11 20:01 ` Tejun Heo
2012-09-11 21:50 ` Paolo Bonzini
2012-09-11 22:02 ` Tejun Heo
2012-09-11 22:10 ` Paolo Bonzini
2012-09-11 22:13 ` Tejun Heo
2012-09-12 8:05 ` James Bottomley
2012-09-12 8:18 ` Paolo Bonzini
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=504898E5.1070507@redhat.com \
--to=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=martin.petersen@oracle.com \
--cc=ricwheeler@gmail.com \
--cc=snitzer@redhat.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).