From: ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman)
To: Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net>
Cc: David Drysdale <drysdale@google.com>,
Alexander Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
Meredydd Luff <meredydd@senatehouse.org>,
"linux-kernel\@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
X86 ML <x86@kernel.org>, linux-arch <linux-arch@vger.kernel.org>,
Linux API <linux-api@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCHv4 RESEND 0/3] syscalls,x86: Add execveat() system call
Date: Sat, 18 Oct 2014 17:20:29 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87zjcszz8y.fsf@x220.int.ebiederm.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CALCETrVraoD+r4zxBoGd+BV5P275AXcRV_R00SSr8fjQzRHnUg@mail.gmail.com> (Andy Lutomirski's message of "Fri, 17 Oct 2014 14:45:03 -0700")
Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net> writes:
> [Added Eric Biederman, since I think your tree might be a reasonable
> route forward for these patches.]
>
> On Thu, Jun 5, 2014 at 6:40 AM, David Drysdale <drysdale@google.com> wrote:
>> Resending, adding cc:linux-api.
>>
>> Also, it may help to add a little more background -- this patch is
>> needed as a (small) part of implementing Capsicum in the Linux kernel.
>>
>> Capsicum is a security framework that has been present in FreeBSD since
>> version 9.0 (Jan 2012), and is based on concepts from object-capability
>> security [1].
>>
>> One of the features of Capsicum is capability mode, which locks down
>> access to global namespaces such as the filesystem hierarchy. In
>> capability mode, /proc is thus inaccessible and so fexecve(3) doesn't
>> work -- hence the need for a kernel-space
>
> I just found myself wanting this syscall for another reason: injecting
> programs into sandboxes or otherwise heavily locked-down namespaces.
>
> For example, I want to be able to reliably do something like nsenter
> --namespace-flags-here toybox sh. Toybox's shell is unusual in that
> it is more or less fully functional, so this should Just Work (tm),
> except that the toybox binary might not exist in the namespace being
> entered. If execveat were available, I could rig nsenter or a similar
> tool to open it with O_CLOEXEC, enter the namespace, and then call
> execveat.
>
> Is there any reason that these patches can't be merged more or less as
> is for 3.19?
Yes. There is a silliness in how it implements fexecve. The fexecve
case should be use the empty string "" not a NULL pointer to indication
that. That change will then harmonize execveat with the other ...at
system calls and simplify the code and remove a special case. I believe
using the empty string "" requires implementing the AT_EMPTY_PATH flag.
For sandboxes execveat seems to make a great deal of sense. I can
get the same functionality by passing in a directory file descriptor
calling fchdir and execve so this should not introduce any new security
holes. And using the final file descriptor removes a race.
AT_SYMLINK_NOFOLLOW seems to have some limited utility as well, although
for exec I don't know what problems it can solve.
Until I am done moving I won't have time to pick this up, and the code
clearly needs another revision but I will be happy to work to see that
we get a sane execveat implemented.
Eric
p.s. I don't believe there are any namespaces issues where doing
something with execveat flags make sense.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-10-19 0:21 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-06-05 13:40 David Drysdale
2014-06-05 13:40 ` [PATCHv4 RESEND 1/3] syscalls,x86: implement " David Drysdale
2014-06-23 18:39 ` Kees Cook
2014-06-05 13:40 ` [PATCHv4 RESEND 2/3] syscalls,x86: add selftest for execveat(2) David Drysdale
2014-06-05 13:40 ` [PATCHv4 RESEND man-pages 3/3] execveat.2: initial man page " David Drysdale
2014-06-05 17:14 ` [PATCHv4 RESEND 0/3] syscalls,x86: Add execveat() system call Kees Cook
2014-10-17 21:45 ` Andy Lutomirski
2014-10-19 0:20 ` Eric W. Biederman [this message]
2014-10-19 19:11 ` Andy Lutomirski
2014-10-20 13:48 ` David Drysdale
2014-10-20 22:48 ` Andy Lutomirski
2014-10-21 4:29 ` Eric W. Biederman
2014-10-22 11:08 ` David Drysdale
2014-10-22 17:40 ` Eric W. Biederman
2014-10-27 18:01 ` David Drysdale
2014-10-19 20:20 ` Al Viro
2014-10-19 20:37 ` Andy Lutomirski
2014-10-19 21:29 ` Al Viro
2014-10-19 22:16 ` Andy Lutomirski
2014-10-19 22:42 ` Al Viro
2014-10-19 23:35 ` Andy Lutomirski
2014-10-25 21:22 ` Pavel Machek
2014-10-19 20:53 ` H. Peter Anvin
2014-10-22 11:54 ` Christoph Hellwig
2014-10-22 11:54 ` Christoph Hellwig
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=87zjcszz8y.fsf@x220.int.ebiederm.org \
--to=ebiederm@xmission.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=arnd@arndb.de \
--cc=drysdale@google.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=keescook@chromium.org \
--cc=linux-api@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-arch@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=luto@amacapital.net \
--cc=meredydd@senatehouse.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
--cc=x86@kernel.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
Powered by JetHome