[HN Gopher] Slowing the flow of core-dump-related CVEs
___________________________________________________________________
Slowing the flow of core-dump-related CVEs
Author : jwilk
Score : 72 points
Date : 2025-06-10 20:07 UTC (4 days ago)
(HTM) web link (lwn.net)
(TXT) w3m dump (lwn.net)
| charcircuit wrote:
| >For example, the core-dump handler is launched by the kernel as
| a user-mode helper, meaning that it runs fully privileged in the
| root namespace.
|
| Why is it not run as a dedicated core dump user?
|
| >the core-dump socket to a helper can be intercepted
|
| There have been several vulnerabilities related to this feature
| of passing core files to a container. I question if this feature
| is actually worth it considering one probably wants to have
| shared infrastructure for crash reporting anyways.
| rwmj wrote:
| > Why is it not run as a dedicated core dump user?
|
| You could imagine an API that sets the UID of this user, and
| the kernel could easily run the coredump handler as that user,
| but the kernel can't so easily automate the creation of a
| complicated namespace to contain that process (and the process
| can't do it itself because it could be exploited before it gets
| around to it). Look at the code in runc some time to see how
| complicated setting up a namespace has got.
|
| > one probably wants to have shared infrastructure for crash
| reporting anyways
|
| Not really on a single machine. coredumpctl actually works very
| well for solo development, I use it all the time.
| nolist_policy wrote:
| You're thinking to complicated. You can configure the
| coredump helper in a way that the kernel presents it with the
| coredump on stdin. So you drop privileges and self-sandbox at
| startup and only then start reading the coredump from stdin.
|
| IIUC Ubuntu and systemd however choose to dump the process
| manually for some reason and for that you need to have same
| permission as the target process.
| charcircuit wrote:
| >You could imagine an API that sets the UID of this user
|
| No, I think there should be a dedicated user. People will
| configure it in insecure ways if you let them.
|
| >easily automate the creation of a complicated namespace to
| contain that process
|
| Why is this being done. The core dump has already been
| created.
|
| >coredumpctl actually works
|
| Coredumpctl would still be possible without forwarding.
| mort96 wrote:
| I'm having a hard time parsing this because I don't understand
| what "****" is supposed to mean in "**** API". Is it a "shit API"
| or "crap API", indicating that the API has problems? Is it a
| "damn API", which just indicates that the author of the quote is
| annoyed but there's nothing wrong with the API itself?
|
| I assume it's meant to be the first meaning, that the API is bad?
| But the censorship honestly makes me a bit unclear.
| lionkor wrote:
| 4 star API
|
| I'm not sure why people do this censoring; who are they trying
| to get into good relations with?
|
| Either swear, or don't.
| eru wrote:
| I have sympathies for your view; but sometimes it's funnier
| to fake censor things. Though that's more of an artistic
| choice for comedy, than something to do in a technical piece.
|
| Compare https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/CensoredF
| orComed...
| remram wrote:
| This is not that, though.
| majormajor wrote:
| If it was an article posting a censored version of a quote,
| that would be pretty normal. Some publications care about
| different audiences than the people they are quoting might.
|
| Seems weird when you click through the link and it's the
| original social media post where the author censored himself.
| Just say "super poor" or something then.
| DeepYogurt wrote:
| Good to see CVEs driving design change I guess
| 10000truths wrote:
| The design of core dump handling in Linux leaves much to be
| desired. Among its several flaws, the biggest is that it is a
| global setting, accessible only by the root user. A proper design
| would either allow it to be isolated via namespace, or delegated
| to a reaper/subreaper process (in an opt-in fashion for back-
| compat). There has been discussion of the former idea [0] and
| even a submitted patch [1], but it seems like it never went
| anywhere.
|
| [0]: https://groups.google.com/g/linux.kernel/c/hJLP3XcKKSY
|
| [1]: https://mail-archive.com/linux-
| kernel@vger.kernel.org/msg107...
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2025-06-14 23:00 UTC)