public inbox for [email protected]
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jeff Moyer <[email protected]>
To: Ondrej Mosnacek <[email protected]>
Cc: Jens Axboe <[email protected]>,
	Pavel Begunkov <[email protected]>,
	[email protected], [email protected],
	[email protected], [email protected]
Subject: Re: [PATCH] io_uring: don't audit the capability check in io_uring_create()
Date: Tue, 18 Jul 2023 09:30:18 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <[email protected]> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]> (Ondrej Mosnacek's message of "Tue, 18 Jul 2023 13:56:07 +0200")

Hi, Ondrej,

Ondrej Mosnacek <[email protected]> writes:

> The check being unconditional may lead to unwanted denials reported by
> LSMs when a process has the capability granted by DAC, but denied by an
> LSM. In the case of SELinux such denials are a problem, since they can't
> be effectively filtered out via the policy and when not silenced, they
> produce noise that may hide a true problem or an attack.
>
> Since not having the capability merely means that the created io_uring
> context will be accounted against the current user's RLIMIT_MEMLOCK
> limit, we can disable auditing of denials for this check by using
> ns_capable_noaudit() instead of capable().

Could you add a comment, or add some documentation to
ns_capable_noaudit() about when it should be used?  It wasn't apparent
to me, at least, before this explanation.

> Fixes: 2b188cc1bb85 ("Add io_uring IO interface")
> Link: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2193317
> Signed-off-by: Ondrej Mosnacek <[email protected]>
> ---
>  io_uring/io_uring.c | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/io_uring/io_uring.c b/io_uring/io_uring.c
> index 7505de2428e03..a9923676d16d6 100644
> --- a/io_uring/io_uring.c
> +++ b/io_uring/io_uring.c
> @@ -3870,7 +3870,7 @@ static __cold int io_uring_create(unsigned entries, struct io_uring_params *p,
>  		ctx->syscall_iopoll = 1;
>  
>  	ctx->compat = in_compat_syscall();
> -	if (!capable(CAP_IPC_LOCK))
> +	if (!ns_capable_noaudit(&init_user_ns, CAP_IPC_LOCK))
>  		ctx->user = get_uid(current_user());
>  
>  	/*

Reviewed-by: Jeff Moyer <[email protected]>


  reply	other threads:[~2023-07-18 13:25 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2023-07-18 11:56 [PATCH] io_uring: don't audit the capability check in io_uring_create() Ondrej Mosnacek
2023-07-18 13:30 ` Jeff Moyer [this message]
2023-07-25 11:07   ` Ondrej Mosnacek
2023-07-18 20:16 ` Jens Axboe

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 \
    [email protected] \
    [email protected] \
    [email protected] \
    [email protected] \
    [email protected] \
    [email protected] \
    [email protected] \
    [email protected] \
    [email protected] \
    /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