if (!noctty &&
current->signal->leader &&
!current->signal->tty &&
- tty->session == NULL)
- __proc_set_tty(tty);
+ tty->session == NULL) {
+ /*
+ * Don't let a process that only has write access to the tty
+ * obtain the privileges associated with having a tty as
+ * controlling terminal (being able to reopen it with full
+ * access through /dev/tty, being able to perform pushback).
+ * Many distributions set the group of all ttys to "tty" and
+ * grant write-only access to all terminals for setgid tty
+ * binaries, which should not imply full privileges on all ttys.
+ *
+ * This could theoretically break old code that performs open()
+ * on a write-only file descriptor. In that case, it might be
+ * necessary to also permit this if
+ * inode_permission(inode, MAY_READ) == 0.
+ */
+ if (filp->f_mode & FMODE_READ)
+ __proc_set_tty(tty);
+ }
spin_unlock_irq(¤t->sighand->siglock);
read_unlock(&tasklist_lock);
tty_unlock(tty);
* Takes ->siglock() when updating signal->tty
*/
-static int tiocsctty(struct tty_struct *tty, int arg)
+static int tiocsctty(struct tty_struct *tty, struct file *file, int arg)
{
int ret = 0;
goto unlock;
}
}
+
+ /* See the comment in tty_open(). */
+ if ((file->f_mode & FMODE_READ) == 0 && !capable(CAP_SYS_ADMIN)) {
+ ret = -EPERM;
+ goto unlock;
+ }
+
proc_set_tty(tty);
unlock:
read_unlock(&tasklist_lock);
no_tty();
return 0;
case TIOCSCTTY:
- return tiocsctty(tty, arg);
+ return tiocsctty(tty, file, arg);
case TIOCGPGRP:
return tiocgpgrp(tty, real_tty, p);
case TIOCSPGRP: