Subject: [PATCH net-next] net: allow SO_MARK with CAP_NET_RAW via cmsg

From: Jakub Kicinski <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2022 15:33:57 -0800

There's not reason SO_MARK would be allowed via setsockopt()
and not via cmsg, let's keep the two consistent. See
commit 079925cce1d0 ("net: allow SO_MARK with CAP_NET_RAW")
for justification why NET_RAW -> SO_MARK is safe.

Signed-off-by: Jakub Kicinski <[email-masked]>
--
CC: [email-masked]
---
 net/core/sock.c | 3 ++-
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/net/core/sock.c b/net/core/sock.c
index d6804685f17f..09d31a7dc68f 100644
--- a/net/core/sock.c
+++ b/net/core/sock.c
@@ -2625,7 +2625,8 @@ int __sock_cmsg_send(struct sock *sk, struct msghdr *msg, struct cmsghdr *cmsg,
 
 	switch (cmsg->cmsg_type) {
 	case SO_MARK:
-		if (!ns_capable(sock_net(sk)->user_ns, CAP_NET_ADMIN))
+		if (!ns_capable(sock_net(sk)->user_ns, CAP_NET_RAW) &&
+		    !ns_capable(sock_net(sk)->user_ns, CAP_NET_ADMIN))
 			return -EPERM;
 		if (cmsg->cmsg_len != CMSG_LEN(sizeof(u32)))
 			return -EINVAL;
-- 
2.34.1