> -----Original Message-----
> From: Alan Cox [mailto:gno...@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk]
> Sent: Friday, October 13, 2017 10:20 AM
> To: Limonciello, Mario <mario_limoncie...@dell.com>
> Cc: g...@kroah.com; dvh...@infradead.org; andy.shevche...@gmail.com;
> linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; platform-driver-...@vger.kernel.org;
> l...@kernel.org; quasi...@google.com; pali.ro...@gmail.com;
> r...@rjwysocki.net; mj...@google.com; h...@lst.de
> Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 10/15] platform/x86: dell-smbios: add filtering 
> capability
> for requests
> 
> On Fri, 13 Oct 2017 15:03:10 +0000
> > Take off your "kernel" hat and put on a "customer" hat for a few moments
> > while I try to put this in practical terms why the whitelist approach 
> > doesn't
> > scale for what I'm trying to do.
> 
> As a customer I'm more worried about someone trashing my system or
> breaking my security.
> 
> > So considering the above isn't offering stuff like this a decision better 
> > made by
> the OEM?
> > If the OEM  doen't want customers to be able to modify something we don't
> offer it in the
> > manageability interface.  If the kernel community doesn't want people to be
> > modifying something the OEM does offer, it can just as well be blacklisted 
> > in
> the
> > kernel driver like the current filtering approach offers.
> 
> So you implement the rule
> 
>       if (whitelisted & (capabilities && whitelist->capability_need) ==
>       whitelist->capability_need))
>               return ALLOWED;
> 
>       if (capable(CAP_SYS_RAWIO))
>               return ALLOWED;
> 
>       return NO
> 
> This puts you in the position where - known tools work and can sometimes
> be unprivileged. Privileged tools with enough priv to screw the machien
> can work anyway. Which is better than the starting point
> 
> 
> You could further enhance this by having a CAP_SYS_RAWIO interface to add
> whitelist entries, or to add an eBPF filter that can also make decisions
> for you.
> 
> Now you've got the ability to push a policy update.
> 
> Alan

Thanks for this idea, I think it's productive in working towards a solution.

I'll give it some more thought on what items I feel should be whitelisted to
unprivileged processes.  I feel like the number of entries that match this will
be fairly low.

I think I'd actually like to meld this with your other ideas and what I've 
currently got.  What do you think of this approach:

        /* kernel community doesn't feel userspace should have access at all
          * or other kernel drivers use this
          */
        if (blacklisted)
                return NO;

        /* unprivileged access allowed */
        if (whitelisted & (capabilities && whitelist->capability_need) ==
        whitelist->capability_need))
                return ALLOWED;
 
        /* not yet in whitelist, or need privs to do */
        if (capable(CAP_SYS_RAWIO))
                return ALLOWED;
 
        return NO

Reply via email to