netdev
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [Coverity] Untrusted user data in kernel

To: Bill Davidsen <davidsen@xxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [Coverity] Untrusted user data in kernel
From: linux-os <linux-os@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2004 11:11:37 -0500 (EST)
Cc: James Morris <jmorris@xxxxxxxxxx>, Patrick McHardy <kaber@xxxxxxxxx>, Bryan Fulton <bryan@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx, netfilter-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <41C2FF99.3020908@xxxxxxx>
References: <41C26DD1.7070006@xxxxxxxxx> <Xine.LNX.4.44.0412170144410.12579-100000@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <41C2FF99.3020908@xxxxxxx>
Reply-to: linux-os@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Sender: netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
On Fri, 17 Dec 2004, Bill Davidsen wrote:

James Morris wrote:
On Fri, 17 Dec 2004, Patrick McHardy wrote:


James Morris wrote:


This at least needs CAP_NET_ADMIN.


It is already checked in do_ip6t_set_ctl(). Otherwise anyone could
replace iptables rules :)


That's what I meant, you need the capability to do anything bad :-)

Are you saying that processes with capability don't make mistakes? This isn't a bug related to untrusted users doing privileged operations, it's a case of using unchecked user data.


But isn't there always the possibility of "unchecked user data"?
I can, as root, do `cp /dev/zero /dev/mem` and have the most
spectacular crask you've evet seen. I can even make my file-
systems unrecoverable.



Cheers,
Dick Johnson
Penguin : Linux version 2.6.9 on an i686 machine (5537.79 BogoMips).
 Notice : All mail here is now cached for review by Dictator Bush.
                 98.36% of all statistics are fiction.

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>