lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2020]   [Oct]   [10]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: LPC 2020 Hackroom Session: summary and next steps for isolated user namespaces
> 3. Find a way to allow setgroups() in a user namespace while keeping
> in mind the case of groups used for negative access control.
> This was suggested by Josh Triplett and Geoffrey Thomas. Their idea was to
> investigate adding a prctl() to allow setgroups() to be called in a user
> namespace at the cost of restricting paths to the most restrictive
> permission. So if something is 0707 it needs to be treated as if it's 0000
> even though the caller is not in its owning group which is used for negative
> access control (how these new semantics will interact with ACLs will also
> need to be looked into).

I should probably think this through more, but for this problem, would it
not suffice to add a new prevgroups grouplist to the struct cred, maybe
struct group_info *locked_groups, and every time an unprivileged task creates
a new user namespace, add all its current groups to this list?

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2020-10-10 06:36    [W:0.122 / U:5.300 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site