Re: [PATCH] scsi: allow persistent reservations withoutCAP_SYS_RAWIO

From: James Bottomley
Date: Tue Jun 12 2012 - 13:20:58 EST


On Tue, 2012-06-12 at 18:54 +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> Il 12/06/2012 18:24, Paolo Bonzini ha scritto:
> > Il 12/06/2012 18:21, James Bottomley ha scritto:
> >>>> Persistent reservations commands cannot be issued right now without
> >>>> giving CAP_SYS_RAWIO to the process who wishes to send them. This
> >>>> is a bit heavy-handed, allow these two commands.
> >>
> >> Why is this heavy handed? If you remove CAP_SYS_RAWIO, any userspace
> >> process can send these, which would allow any user to completely disrupt
> >> a SAN by injecting spurious reservations ... that doesn't look to be
> >> terribly safe for an operating system running in a data centre.
> >
> > It is heavy-handed because:
> >
> > 1) there are still other protections such as DAC (both Unix permissions
> > and ACLs) and SELinux; CAP_SYS_RAWIO is effectively the same as root.
> >
> > 2) if any user could disrupt the SAN by injecting spurious reservations
> > just by having his laptop's root password, that data centre wouldn't be
> > terribly safe to begin with.
>
> 3) assume that with this patch user X could disrupt the SAN by injecting
> spurious reservations, e.g. forbidding another user from writing some
> data. Then they could also destroy those same data even without this
> patch, which is just as disrupting.
>
> This is because you still need write permission to the device to issue
> reservations. Read permission will only let you use PERSISTENT RESREVE IN.

I don't think you understand how persistent reservations work.

The first thing I'll say is I agree with Alan. Unless you can justify
why you want to relax permissions I'm not going to do it.

But secondly, the reason we're so up in arms about SCSI-3 PR is that
there's a feature called reservation by transport ID. This is used to
reserve multipath devices when one of the paths is down. Effectively it
allows a PR-OUT command to set a reservation on any LUN with access only
to one of them. It's definitely a hack in the SCSI standard, but it's
not one that can be controlled by a unix like permission model. Write
access to *any* LUN allows you to reserve *all* luns.

James


--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/