4

I know that if a process is run setuid that it's protected against various things that could subvert the process, like LD_PRELOAD and ptrace (debugging). But I haven't been able to find anything on the same being done for capabilities. I assume the same sorts of things are done with capabilities, since otherwise it would have huge security holes, but I haven't been able to find it documented/verified.

4

As mentioned in this Kernel Mailing List message, whether a process needs extra security is checked in cap_bprm_secureexec() of the kernel file security/commoncap.c, which does check for capabilities. This is then exported to the process via the auxiliary vector. This can be accessed/tested via getauxval(AT_SECURE). I inserted getauxval(AT_SECURE) into a test program, and it did indeed return 1 when it was running with any capabilities set and usable, the same as it would if running setuid, so capabilities have the same security protections as setuid.

| improve this answer | |

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.