Follow @Openwall on Twitter for new release announcements and other news
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Tue, 1 Dec 2015 00:03:00 +0100
From: Richard Weinberger <>
To: Kees Cook <>,
 "Eric W. Biederman" <>
Cc: "" <>,
 "" <>,
 "" <>,,
 Stephen Hemminger <>,
Subject: Re: user controllable usermodehelper in br_stp_if.c

Am 30.11.2015 um 21:14 schrieb Kees Cook:
> On Sun, Nov 29, 2015 at 2:43 PM, Richard Weinberger <> wrote:
>> Hi!
>> By spawning new network and user namesapces an unprivileged user
>> is able to execute /sbin/bridge-stp within the initial mount namespace
>> with global root rights.
>> While this cannot directly be used to break out of a container or gain
>> global root rights it could be used by exploit writers as valuable building block.
>> e.g.
>> $ unshare -U -r -n /bin/sh
>> $ brctl addbr br0
>> $ brctl stp br0 on # this will execute /sbin/bridge-stp
>> As this mechanism clearly cannot work with containers and seems to be legacy code
>> I suggest not calling call_usermodehelper() at all if we're not in the initial user namespace.
>> What do you think?
> I'm not familiar with how bridge-stp is expected to operate with a
> network namespace, but if it's meaningless, then yeah, that seems like
> a reasonable change. Can you send a patch? (Also, if it's legacy code,
> maybe it could be turned off entirely, not just for containers?)

Eric was faster than me. :-)

BTW: kernel.core_pattern is also worth a look.
If the pipe mode is used, "|/bin/core_tool", it will be executed in the
initial namespace and any user/container can trigger it.
Shayan reported that some weeks ago:


Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.