Re: [PATCH] signal: fix overflow_uid signal sender

[Oleg Nesterov]

On 11/02, Jann Horn wrote:
>
> On Wed, Nov 02, 2016 at 07:16:41PM +0100, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> > On 10/31, Jann Horn wrote:
> > >
> > >  static inline void userns_fixup_signal_uid(struct siginfo *info, struct task_struct *t)
> > >  {
> > > -	if (current_user_ns() == task_cred_xxx(t, user_ns))
> > > +	if (&init_user_ns == task_cred_xxx(t, user_ns))
> > >  		return;
> > >
> > >  	if (SI_FROMKERNEL(info))
> > > @@ -959,7 +959,7 @@ static inline void userns_fixup_signal_uid(struct siginfo *info, struct task_str
> > >
> > >  	rcu_read_lock();
> > >  	info->si_uid = from_kuid_munged(task_cred_xxx(t, user_ns),
> > > -					make_kuid(current_user_ns(), info->si_uid));
> > > +					make_kuid(&init_user_ns, info->si_uid));
> > >  	rcu_read_unlock();
> > >  }
> > >  #else
> > > @@ -1027,7 +1027,8 @@ static int __send_signal(int sig, struct siginfo *info, struct task_struct *t,
> > >  			q->info.si_code = SI_USER;
> > >  			q->info.si_pid = task_tgid_nr_ns(current,
> > >  							task_active_pid_ns(t));
> > > -			q->info.si_uid = from_kuid_munged(current_user_ns(), current_uid());
> > > +			q->info.si_uid = from_kuid(&init_user_ns,
> > > +						   current_uid());
> >
> > Looks good to me at first glance, but I think this needs an ack from Eric.
> >
> > I have to admit that I forgot how uid_map/etc actually works, I can't
> > even recall if from_kuid(init_user_ns, xxx) == __kuid_val(xxx) or not,
> > although this doesn't really matter.
>
> Yes, from_kuid(&init_user_ns, xxx) == __kuid_val(xxx). For values from 0
> to 0xfffffffe, the uid_map of init_user_ns is an identity map (and it
> can't be changed), and for 0xffffffff, which isn't mapped, it returns
> 0xffffffff to denote failure.

So perhaps we can add another helper to avoid the unnecessary map_id_up()

	from_kuid_init_user_ns(kuid_t kuid)
	{
		return __kuid_val(kuid);
	}

But this is a bit off-topic, let me repeat that your patch looks fine to me.

Oleg.