Re: [PATCH 1/1] cgroups: implement device whitelist (v6)

From: Andrew Morton
Date: Thu Mar 27 2008 - 05:04:48 EST


On Wed, 26 Mar 2008 13:05:43 -0500 "Serge E. Hallyn" <serue@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> (This is identical to the version I sent on Mar 19 in response to
> the comments by Daniel Hokka Zakrisson, which are the last
> comments I've gotten.)
>
> Implement a cgroup to track and enforce open and mknod restrictions on device
> files. A device cgroup associates a device access whitelist with each
> cgroup. A whitelist entry has 4 fields. 'type' is a (all), c (char), or
> b (block). 'all' means it applies to all types and all major and minor
> numbers. Major and minor are either an integer or * for all.
> Access is a composition of r (read), w (write), and m (mknod).
>
> The root device cgroup starts with rwm to 'all'. A child devcg gets
> a copy of the parent. Admins can then remove devices from the
> whitelist or add new entries. A child cgroup can never receive a
> device access which is denied its parent. However when a device
> access is removed from a parent it will not also be removed from the
> child(ren).
>
> An entry is added using devices.allow, and removed using
> devices.deny. For instance
>
> echo 'c 1:3 mr' > /cgroups/1/devices.allow
>
> allows cgroup 1 to read and mknod the device usually known as
> /dev/null. Doing
>
> echo a > /cgroups/1/devices.deny
>
> will remove the default 'a *:* mrw' entry.
>
> CAP_SYS_ADMIN is needed to change permissions or move another task
> to a new cgroup. A cgroup may not be granted more permissions than
> the cgroup's parent has. Any task can move itself between cgroups.
> This won't be sufficient, but we can decide the best way to
> adequately restrict movement later.

The above should be in Documentation/cgroups.txt?

> +static char *print_whitelist(struct dev_cgroup *devcgroup, int *len)
> +{
> + char *buf, *s, acc[4];
> + struct dev_whitelist_item *wh;
> + int ret;
> + int count = 0;
> + char maj[10], min[10];
> +
> + buf = kmalloc(4096, GFP_KERNEL);
> + if (!buf)
> + return ERR_PTR(-ENOMEM);
> + s = buf;
> + *s = '\0';
> + *len = 0;
> +
> + spin_lock(&devcgroup->lock);
> + list_for_each_entry(wh, &devcgroup->whitelist, list) {
> + set_access(acc, wh->access);
> + set_majmin(maj, 10, wh->major);
> + set_majmin(min, 10, wh->minor);
> + ret = snprintf(s, 4095-(s-buf), "%c %s:%s %s\n",
> + type_to_char(wh->type), maj, min, acc);
> + if (s+ret >= buf+4095) {
> + kfree(buf);
> + buf = ERR_PTR(-ENOMEM);
> + break;
> + }
> + s += ret;
> + *len += ret;
> + count++;
> + }
> + spin_unlock(&devcgroup->lock);
> +
> + return buf;
> +}

That's rather ugly-looking. We can't use seq_file here?


--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/