Launchpad has imported 25 comments from the remote bug at https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=651183.
If you reply to an imported comment from within Launchpad, your comment will be sent to the remote bug automatically. Read more about Launchpad's inter-bugtracker facilities at https://help.launchpad.net/InterBugTracking. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ On 2010-11-08T22:35:33+00:00 Vincent wrote: It was reported [1],[2] that the fusermount tool was vulnerable to a race condition between mounting a user filesystem and updating mtab using the standard mount command. If a user were able to win the race, the real mount entry and the mtab entry would differ, making the fuse- mounted filesystem not unmountable by an unprivileged user. Crafted mtab entries can then be used to trick fusermount into believing that a certain part of the filesystem is a user-space filesystem, and will unmount what should be a privileged filesystem (as demonstrated by unmounting /proc). According to the SUSE bug report [3], this would affect fuse versions before 2.8.2 or util-linux before 2.17, and notes the following commits that correct the problem: Relevant fuse commits: 4c3d9b1957 "Use '--no-canonicalize' option of mount(8)..." 0197ce4041 "Using --no-canonicalize with umount(8) conflicts with..." and util-linux commits: 45fc569a75 "mount: add --no-canonicalize option" be9adec40f "mount: disable --no-canonicalize for non-root users" [1] http://www.halfdog.net/Security/FuseTimerace/ [2] http://seclists.org/fulldisclosure/2010/Nov/15 [3] https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=651598 Reply at: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/fuse/+bug/670622/comments/3 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ On 2010-11-23T21:25:36+00:00 Vincent wrote: In addition to the --no-canonicalize option, the --fake option is also required in umount, which is present in 2.18: http://git.kernel.org/?p=utils/util-linux-ng/util-linux- ng.git;a=commitdiff;h=97a3cef4f1 Another relevant util-linux-ng commit is: http://git.kernel.org/?p=utils/util-linux-ng/util-linux- ng.git;a=commitdiff;h=1cf4c20b19 ("spec" still canonicalized) The above two would be required for util-linux-ng in RHEL6. All of the commits would be required for util-linux in RHEL5. Fedora 14 has the required util-linux-ng version, but needs the fuse fixes backported. SUSE has a patch to fuse to make it use --no- canonicalize and --fake which should fix the issue: https://bugzilla.novell.com/attachment.cgi?id=399921 Unfortunately, I've been using RHEL6 to test and with the above patches (to fuse and util-linux-ng) and the proof of concept still works. So I don't think these patches are sufficient to correct the problem, although I'm not sure what is missing. Tom, would have a chance to look at this and see if perhaps something is missing? FWIW, I cannot reproduce this on F14. Despite there being no group-restrictions on fuse (not sure why that's the case), I get the following error: sh Test.sh Using target call count 8 Move triggered at count 8 fusermount: user has no write access to mountpoint /proc fusermount: could not determine username (although sometimes that first fusermount error shows: fusermount: user has no write access to mountpoint /home/vdanen/tmp/CVE-2010-3879/tmp/proc which is the user-mounted directory). By contrast, fuse-2.8.5-2.fc13 and util-linux-ng-2.17.2-8.fc13 allow me to reproduce this on F13. The same fuse version is on both, but F14 has (a newer) util-linux-ng-2.18-4.5.fc14. Reply at: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/fuse/+bug/670622/comments/7 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ On 2010-11-23T22:06:49+00:00 Vincent wrote: After rebuilding util-linux-ng-2.18-4.5 on Fedora 13, I am still able to reproduce the problem. Then I realized there was an issue with my F14 testing vm, so after rebooting it, I can indeed reproduce this on F14 (seems something was mucked with sssd which is why I was seeing those permissions errors). Reply at: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/fuse/+bug/670622/comments/8 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ On 2010-11-23T22:38:27+00:00 Vincent wrote: Patched fuse on F14 and still reproduces (using the SUSE patch). So it's either not sufficient or something is still missing from util- linux-ng (on F14, the 1cf4c20b19 patch is missing; rebuilt with just that patch (on 2.18-4.5) and can still reproduce). So it looks like there is more required than any of these patches to resolve this. Reply at: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/fuse/+bug/670622/comments/9 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ On 2011-01-21T22:29:19+00:00 Vincent wrote: This has stalled for quite a bit. Has any developer/owner of fuse been able to take a look into this to see what is going on? Reply at: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/fuse/+bug/670622/comments/17 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ On 2011-01-26T21:59:05+00:00 Vincent wrote: Ubuntu has released advisories to correct this: http://www.ubuntu.com/usn/usn-1045-1 (fuse) http://www.ubuntu.com/usn/usn-1045-2 (mount) But I can still reproduce the issue on 10.04 LTS (although it doesn't like the Makefile too much): user@ubuntu:~/CVE-2010-3879$ make [[ -x DirModifyInotify ]] && rm -f DirModifyInotify || : /bin/sh: [[: not found [[ -x FuseMinimal ]] && rm -f FuseMinimal || : /bin/sh: [[: not found [[ -L tmp ]] && rm -f tmp || : /bin/sh: [[: not found [[ -d tmp-moved ]] && rm -rf tmp-moved || : /bin/sh: [[: not found [[ -d tmp-moved ]] && sudo umount tmp-moved/proc && rm -rf tmp-moved || : /bin/sh: [[: not found gcc -o DirModifyInotify DirModifyInotify.c gcc -D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64 -lfuse -Wall FuseMinimal.c -o FuseMinimal ps ax | grep init | grep -v grep 1 ? Ss 0:01 /sbin/init sh Test.sh Using target call count 8 Move triggered at count 8 Cannot find /proc/version - is /proc mounted? make: *** [test] Error 1 user@ubuntu:~/CVE-2010-3879$ dpkg -l mount libfuse2 Desired=Unknown/Install/Remove/Purge/Hold | Status=Not/Inst/Cfg-files/Unpacked/Failed-cfg/Half-inst/trig-aWait/Trig-pend |/ Err?=(none)/Reinst-required (Status,Err: uppercase=bad) ||/ Name Version Description +++-==============-==============-============================================ ii libfuse2 2.8.1-1.1ubunt Filesystem in USErspace library ii mount 2.17.2-0ubuntu Tools for mounting and manipulating filesyst Those are the packages that are supposed to fix the flaw. Reply at: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/fuse/+bug/670622/comments/18 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ On 2011-01-26T22:08:48+00:00 Vincent wrote: I noticed they had released updates to fix it and figured I'd make sure before going through the work of extracting their patches (which they backported from upstream by the looks of things). It still takes a bit of persistance, but it works. No one else has released updates for this. At this point I think we're going to defer it because we don't have a working fix (I'm not even sure if upstream does either at this point) and, for RHEL at least, you need to be in the fuse group to do anything with this. Does anyone know why Fedora does not have the same policy (of the user having to be in the fuse group in order to use the tools)? fuse-2.8.5-2.fc14 (fuse): /bin/fusermount (4755,*root,root) fuse-2.8.1-4.fc13 (fuse): /bin/fusermount (4755,*root,root) fuse-2.7.4-8.el5 (fuse): /bin/fusermount (4750,*root,fuse) fuse-2.8.3-1.el6 (fuse): /bin/fusermount (4750,*root,fuse) Reply at: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/fuse/+bug/670622/comments/19 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ On 2011-01-27T17:34:22+00:00 Vincent wrote: Created attachment 475647 Ubuntu patch for fuse-2.7.2 Reply at: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/fuse/+bug/670622/comments/20 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ On 2011-01-27T17:57:21+00:00 Vincent wrote: Created attachment 475653 modified test script Output from Ubuntu using a modified test case (requires the original reproducer). You do have to run it twice to get /proc properly umounted. user@ubuntu:~/CVE-2010-3879$ cat /etc/issue.net Ubuntu 10.04.1 LTS user@ubuntu:~/CVE-2010-3879$ sh test.sh pre-run, make sure ps is working user 2031 0.0 0.0 1832 536 pts/0 S+ 12:53 0:00 sh test.sh user 2032 0.0 0.1 2716 1068 pts/0 R+ 12:53 0:00 ps aux user 2033 0.0 0.0 3260 660 pts/0 S+ 12:53 0:00 tail -3 DirModifyInotify: no process found FuseMinimal: no process found gcc -o DirModifyInotify DirModifyInotify.c gcc -D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64 -lfuse -Wall FuseMinimal.c -o FuseMinimal Using target call count 8 Move triggered at count 8 fusermount: entry for /proc not found in /etc/mtab post-run, is ps still working? user 2054 0.0 0.0 18732 676 ? Ssl 12:53 0:00 ../../FuseMinimal . user 2061 0.0 0.1 2716 1068 pts/0 R+ 12:53 0:00 ps aux user 2062 0.0 0.0 3260 664 pts/0 S+ 12:53 0:00 tail -3 user@ubuntu:~/CVE-2010-3879$ sh test.sh pre-run, make sure ps is working user 2063 0.0 0.0 1832 536 pts/0 S+ 12:53 0:00 sh test.sh user 2064 0.0 0.1 2716 1068 pts/0 R+ 12:53 0:00 ps aux user 2065 0.0 0.0 3260 664 pts/0 S+ 12:53 0:00 tail -3 rm: cannot remove `tmp-moved/proc': Transport endpoint is not connected [sudo] password for user: Using target call count 8 Move triggered at count 8 post-run, is ps still working? Cannot find /proc/version - is /proc mounted? user@ubuntu:~/CVE-2010-3879$ ps Cannot find /proc/version - is /proc mounted? Reply at: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/fuse/+bug/670622/comments/21 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ On 2011-01-27T20:00:55+00:00 Karel wrote: I have updated util-linux-ng in Fedora 14, util-linux-ng-2.18-4.8.fc14 Reply at: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/fuse/+bug/670622/comments/22 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ On 2011-01-27T20:38:52+00:00 Vincent wrote: Created fuse tracking bugs for this issue Affects: fedora-all [bug 673253] Reply at: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/fuse/+bug/670622/comments/23 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ On 2011-01-27T20:38:55+00:00 Vincent wrote: Created util-linux-ng tracking bugs for this issue Affects: fedora-all [bug 673254] Reply at: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/fuse/+bug/670622/comments/24 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ On 2011-01-27T20:42:45+00:00 Josef wrote: I'm not sure fuse is on the approved component list for 6.1, so this will still have to wait until 6.2. Also this probably needs to depend on the kernel component as well (which is bz673177). Reply at: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/fuse/+bug/670622/comments/25 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ On 2011-01-28T18:41:19+00:00 Vincent wrote: I've just installed util-linux-ng-2.18-4.8.fc14 from koji in my F14/x86_64 VM and did a git clone of the fuse git repository and built an rpm from it to install in the VM. So with the util-linux-ng that gives us the options we need, and upstream's latest code for fuse, I can still reproduce this, so it is not fixed upstream. Reply at: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/fuse/+bug/670622/comments/26 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ On 2011-01-28T20:10:41+00:00 Karel wrote: I found in the fuse upstream commit eba226948b44d5a303a10908d440e808eaf0bae6 that the code checks for "util- linux-ng 2.18" in the "mount --version" output (yeah, there is hardcoded package name and version). It means that this code will be useless on systems where we backport patches (RHEL6 with util-linux 2.17) or in distributions where is already the latest upstream without the "-ng" suffix (Fedora >= 15). I'll send an e-mail to Miklos. Reply at: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/fuse/+bug/670622/comments/27 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ On 2011-01-28T20:29:19+00:00 Vincent wrote: Wouldn't we use the --disable-legacy-umount option to configure to get around that? Reply at: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/fuse/+bug/670622/comments/28 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ On 2011-02-23T17:58:00+00:00 Vincent wrote: More CVE names have been assigned to this issue. Since we would need to fix them all to get a comprehensive fix, I'm noting them all here as opposed to filing new bugs. Marc Deslauriers summarized the following on oss-security (http://seclists.org/oss-sec/2011/q1/173): CVE-2011-0541: http://fuse.git.sourceforge.net/git/gitweb.cgi?p=fuse/fuse;a=commit;h=bf5ffb5fd8558bd799791834def431c0cee5a11f Fuse tries to mount a directory without resolving symlinks, and then tries to update mtab. If it couldn't update mtab, it would unmount the directory while resolving symlinks this time, resulting in a different directory being unmounted. CVE-2011-0542: http://fuse.git.sourceforge.net/git/gitweb.cgi?p=fuse/fuse;a=commit;h=1e7607ff89c65b005f69e27aeb1649d624099873 This prevents local users from changing the location of the current directory from under fuse using a timing attack. CVE-2011-0543: http://fuse.git.sourceforge.net/git/gitweb.cgi?p=fuse/fuse;a=commit;h=cbd3a2a84068aae6e3fe32939d88470d712dbf47 Fuse uses the --no-canonicalize mount option to prevent a symlink attack on the mount point written to mtab. For backwards compatibility reasons, it would fallback to using mount in an insecure way. This fallback could get triggered by a user when an entry already existed in mtab. All three of these issues allowed local users to trick fuse into unmounting arbitrary directories. Reply at: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/fuse/+bug/670622/comments/31 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ On 2011-02-23T17:59:55+00:00 Vincent wrote: We should now have enough information to get this fully corrected in Fedora. Reply at: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/fuse/+bug/670622/comments/32 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ On 2011-03-21T19:07:10+00:00 Vincent wrote: Created attachment 486670 patch to correct the flaw in fuse on Fedora 14 (v2.8.5) Current fuse 2.8.5-5.fc14 still fails. I've taken the three upstream commits, merged them, and added the missing bits to make them complete and I've tested it with the original exploit and the new test that showed the failures on Ubuntu, running them 20 times in a row, without being able to umount /proc. I believe that this patch will solve the problem, or at least get us closer (it does work for me, but I've not tested it any way other than using these tests to make sure it was no longer possible to unmount /proc). % # first run after a fresh boot % sh new-test.sh pre-run, make sure ps is working vdanen 2233 0.0 0.1 106204 1184 pts/0 S+ 13:01 0:00 sh new-test.sh vdanen 2234 0.0 0.1 110156 1104 pts/0 R+ 13:01 0:00 ps aux vdanen 2235 0.0 0.0 101016 604 pts/0 S+ 13:01 0:00 tail -3 DirModifyInotify: no process found FuseMinimal: no process found gcc -o DirModifyInotify DirModifyInotify.c gcc -D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64 -lfuse -Wall FuseMinimal.c -o FuseMinimal Using target call count 8 Move triggered at count 8 fusermount: entry for /proc not found in /etc/mtab post-run, is ps still working? vdanen 2257 0.0 0.0 234524 488 ? Ssl 13:01 0:00 ../../FuseMinimal . vdanen 2265 0.0 0.1 110152 1104 pts/0 R+ 13:01 0:00 ps aux vdanen 2266 0.0 0.0 101016 608 pts/0 S+ 13:01 0:00 tail -3 % # second run % sh new-test.sh pre-run, make sure ps is working vdanen 2267 0.0 0.1 106204 1180 pts/0 S+ 13:01 0:00 sh new-test.sh vdanen 2268 0.0 0.1 110152 1104 pts/0 R+ 13:01 0:00 ps aux vdanen 2269 0.0 0.0 101016 604 pts/0 S+ 13:01 0:00 tail -3 rm: cannot remove `tmp-moved/proc': Is a directory Using target call count 8 Move triggered at count 8 fusermount: user has no write access to mountpoint /proc fusermount: entry for /proc not found in /etc/mtab post-run, is ps still working? vdanen 2281 0.0 0.0 4128 280 pts/0 S+ 13:01 0:00 ./DirModifyInotify --Watch tmp/proc --Watch /etc/mtab --WatchCount 8 --MovePath tmp --LinkTarget / vdanen 2289 1.0 0.1 110156 1108 pts/0 R+ 13:01 0:00 ps aux vdanen 2290 0.0 0.0 101016 608 pts/0 S+ 13:01 0:00 tail -3 Reply at: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/fuse/+bug/670622/comments/33 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ On 2011-03-21T20:03:04+00:00 Peter wrote: Hello Vincent and sorry for the hiatus - I was extremely busy last several months. I'll review your patch and apply it very soon. Reply at: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/fuse/+bug/670622/comments/34 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ On 2011-03-21T20:25:05+00:00 Vincent wrote: Created attachment 486688 patch to correct the flaw in fuse on RHEL6 (v2.8.3) This patch works for RHEL6, but requires a fixed util-linux-ng. Reply at: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/fuse/+bug/670622/comments/35 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ On 2011-03-21T20:26:08+00:00 Vincent wrote: (In reply to comment #41) > Hello Vincent and sorry for the hiatus - I was extremely busy last several > months. I'll review your patch and apply it very soon. Thanks, Peter. That would be great. My back-porting skills are ok, but I'd like to make sure that nothing got broken in the process. It does solve the problem itself, I'm just hoping there are no other regressions. A review would be very much appreciated. Reply at: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/fuse/+bug/670622/comments/36 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ On 2011-03-30T20:45:44+00:00 Vincent wrote: On Red Hat Enterprise Linux this is a low impact issue due to the fuse group requirement. The appropriate CVSSv2 score for Red Hat Enterprise Linux is 2.6/AV:L/AC:H/Au:N/C:N/I:P/A:P (AC:H due to an administrator needing to add someone to the fuse group). On Fedora it is different, because there are no group restrictions in place. On Fedora, this is a moderate impact issue (3.6/AV:L/AC:L/Au:N/C:N/I:P/A:P). Reply at: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/fuse/+bug/670622/comments/38 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ On 2011-07-20T18:18:34+00:00 errata-xmlrpc wrote: This issue has been addressed in following products: Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6 Via RHSA-2011:1083 https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2011-1083.html Reply at: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/fuse/+bug/670622/comments/44 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ On 2011-07-20T18:24:17+00:00 Vincent wrote: Statement: The Red Hat Security Response Team has rated this issue as having low security impact. On Red Hat Enterprise Linux 5 and 6, a user must be a member of the 'fuse' group in order to use FUSE. Due to the risks associated with fixing this bug on Red Hat Enterprise Linux 5, and because of the group restrictions in place, we currently have no plans to fix this flaw in Red Hat Enterprise Linux 5. Reply at: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/fuse/+bug/670622/comments/45 ** Changed in: fuse (Fedora) Status: Unknown => Fix Released ** Changed in: fuse (Fedora) Importance: Unknown => Low ** CVE added: https://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=2011-0541 ** CVE added: https://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=2011-0542 ** CVE added: https://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=2011-0543 -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/670622 Title: fusermount allows unmount any filesystem To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/fuse/+bug/670622/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
