coreutils
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: chroot's userspec option


From: Ken Werner
Subject: Re: chroot's userspec option
Date: Sat, 01 Mar 2014 09:21:33 +0100
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.3.0

On 02/28/2014 02:27 PM, Pádraig Brady wrote:
On 02/28/2014 10:34 AM, Ken Werner wrote:
On 02/27/2014 05:45 PM, Pádraig Brady wrote:
On 02/27/2014 03:48 PM, Ken Werner wrote:
Hi,

I noticed when using chroot's --userspec option the Gnulib's parse_user_spec function 
gets called that leads the glibc to dlopen libnss_compat.so.2 (probably getpwnam() that 
triggers the libc's NSS mechanism). Since parse_user_spec is called after the chroot 
system call the new root directory will be searched. I guess this means that the chroot 
utility attempts to parse the user spec in the "guest" environment. Is this 
behavior intended? In my case the chroot environment contains a libnss_compat.so.2 that's 
not compatible and the chroot utility fails with:

/usr/bin/chroot: relocation error: /lib/libnss_compat.so.2: symbol 
_nss_files_parse_pwent, version GLIBC_2.0 not defined in file libc.so.6 with 
link time reference

As soon as I LD_PRELOAD libnss_compat.so.2 the "host" environment is used to 
parse the user spec. If this is the intended behavior it would be better if chroot calls 
the parse_user_spec prior issuing the chroot syscall. Any thoughts? :)

This issue was noted previously with an explicit workaround:
    http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/coreutils/2011-07/msg00057.html

Then again with an implicit workaround:
    http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/coreutils/2012-05/msg00018.html

I had mentioned an amendment to that but there was no response.

I'll look at a fix now to do:

t_ids = parse_user_spec(); //outside chroot
ids = parse_user_spec(); //inside chroot
if (!ids)
    ids = t_ids;

Thank you for providing those pointers! I have to admit that it's still not 
clear to me whether the userspec option is supposed to lookup the user/group 
using the A) the old or B) the new root. In case of A) the fix would be call 
parse_user_spec prior switching to the new root. While B) is not trivial to 
support imho. The way it's implemented by now assumes the libc's NSS plugins of 
the new root are compatible to the libc of the old root. As you noticed that's 
not the case when chrooting into a 32bit userland on a 64bit system (and there 
are many more cases).

Since I do not really depend on the uid/gid lookup I wondered why getpwnam() 
and getgrnam() are still called even if numeric IDs are provided rather than 
the names. It turns out the code [1] only skips the lookup if the IDs are 
prefixed with '+'. For example:
   chroot --userspec=+1234:+1234 /path/to/new/root

Unfortunately the --groups option doesn't have a way to skip the lookup 
currently [2]. It calls getgrgid/getgrnam that probably trigger libc's NSS 
plugins as well.

I guess the first thing would be to discuss and decide which approach is the 
desired one - then to post patches that changes the docs+code accordingly. /me 
ducks ;)

[1] Gnulib's userspec.c:parse_user_spec calls parse_with_separator that skips 
the lookup in case the first char is a '+':
http://git.savannah.gnu.org/gitweb/?p=gnulib.git;a=blob;f=lib/userspec.c;h=1be9266eb54638a2624d0a9205d8e68fd516205e;hb=HEAD#l160

[2] Coretutil's chroot.c:main calls set_additional_groups() that calls 
getgrgid/getgrnam:
http://git.savannah.gnu.org/gitweb/?p=coreutils.git;a=blob;f=src/chroot.c;h=50bb2537ea7df4b963e151bbcb54c217533f32d0;hb=HEAD#l66

Thanks for looking into the details.

Yes the `chroot --userspec=+1234:+1234 --groups=+123,+456 /new/root` technique 
is a good way
to specify that the lookup is done outside. I.E. one can do the name lookup 
outside like:

   group_ids() { printf '%s\n' "$@" | xargs -n1 id -gr | sed 's/^/+/' | paste 
-s -d,; }
   chroot --userspec=+$(id -ur user):+$(id -gr user) --groups=$(group_ids 
group1 group2) /new/root

Now the above is a bit awkward, but also not the usual case.
I.E. one only needs to specify a +number when _enforcing_ outside lookup.
I.E. that's only needed when there are different IDs inside and out,
and we want to use the outside ones. We'll document this at least.
We should also document that this is more secure in the unusual
case where the whole chroot is untrusted, as less code is executed
between the chroot() and the setuid().

Now to support that, --groups will need to be adjusted as you mention.
Currently is does getgrgid() to better validate the passed group IDs,
by providing diagnostics for a particular invalid ID in the list.
Now that could be changed to only do the lookup if the setgroups fails.
Also I notice that --groups assumes an ID if numeric, even without a leading +.
That's inconsistent, so we should fix that up too (we already lookup the
name in all cases now, so adding the + constraint to avoid that will
not be adding new restrictions).

So with the above in place we can enforce lookup outside.
But again needing that is unusual, and we can just do name
lookups as normal like:

  t_ids = parse_user_spec(); //outside chroot
  ids = parse_user_spec(); //inside chroot in case different
  if (!ids)
     ids = t_ids;

I would have thought in case numerid IDs are specified there's no need to perform any outside nor inside lookup. When prefixing the IDs using '+' the chroot utility just uses the provided numbers for the setuid/setgid calls - that's fine as it is. It'd be great if the --groups option would also recognize this notation and the documentation have a note on that.

Regards,
Ken




reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]