Re: Leaking Path in XFS's ioctl interface(missing LSM check)

[Dave Chinner]

On Tue, Oct 02, 2018 at 06:08:16AM +1000, James Morris wrote:
> On Mon, 1 Oct 2018, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
> 
> > If we /did/ replace CAP_SYS_ADMIN checking with a pile of LSM hooks,
> 
> Not sure we'd need a pile of hooks, what about just "read" and "write" 
> storage admin?
> 
> Or even two new capabilities along these lines, which we convert existing 
> CAP_SYS_ADMIN etc. to?

So instead of having hundreds of management ioctls under
CAP_SYS_ADMIN, we'd now have hundreds of non-storage ioctls under
CAP_SYS_ADMIN and hundreds of storage ioctls under
CAP_SYS_STORAGE_ADMIN?

Maybe I'm missing something, but I don't see how that improves the
situation w.r.t. locked down LSM configurations?

Cheers,

Dave.


-- 
Dave Chinner
david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx