* Time to remove compat_net?
@ 2007-08-30 20:07 Paul Moore
2007-08-30 20:12 ` Stephen Smalley
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Paul Moore @ 2007-08-30 20:07 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: selinux
Does anyone have any objections to placing the compat_net code on the
kernel's "feature removal schedule" (I'd go for removal in 2/2008, six months
from now)? SECMARK can do everything that the older compat_net controls can
do, and it does it with less overhead and a cleaner implementation.
--
paul moore
linux security @ hp
--
This message was distributed to subscribers of the selinux mailing list.
If you no longer wish to subscribe, send mail to majordomo@tycho.nsa.gov with
the words "unsubscribe selinux" without quotes as the message.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: Time to remove compat_net?
2007-08-30 20:07 Time to remove compat_net? Paul Moore
@ 2007-08-30 20:12 ` Stephen Smalley
2007-08-30 20:33 ` Paul Moore
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Stephen Smalley @ 2007-08-30 20:12 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Paul Moore; +Cc: selinux, Eric Paris, Karl MacMillan, James Morris
On Thu, 2007-08-30 at 16:07 -0400, Paul Moore wrote:
> Does anyone have any objections to placing the compat_net code on the
> kernel's "feature removal schedule" (I'd go for removal in 2/2008, six months
> from now)? SECMARK can do everything that the older compat_net controls can
> do, and it does it with less overhead and a cleaner implementation.
I'd be happy to see it go (conditional checks considered harmful), but a
good starting point would be to get secmark turned on in Fedora (it was
still off last I looked) and verify that nothing breaks.
We also don't have any tools capable of managing secmark today; with the
legacy controls, we could labels ports and netifs via semanage. Only
secmark userland integration to date has been the basic iptables command
line support.
--
Stephen Smalley
National Security Agency
--
This message was distributed to subscribers of the selinux mailing list.
If you no longer wish to subscribe, send mail to majordomo@tycho.nsa.gov with
the words "unsubscribe selinux" without quotes as the message.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: Time to remove compat_net?
2007-08-30 20:12 ` Stephen Smalley
@ 2007-08-30 20:33 ` Paul Moore
2007-09-03 15:02 ` Karl MacMillan
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Paul Moore @ 2007-08-30 20:33 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Stephen Smalley; +Cc: selinux, Eric Paris, Karl MacMillan, James Morris
On Thursday, August 30 2007 4:12:24 pm Stephen Smalley wrote:
> On Thu, 2007-08-30 at 16:07 -0400, Paul Moore wrote:
> > Does anyone have any objections to placing the compat_net code on the
> > kernel's "feature removal schedule" (I'd go for removal in 2/2008, six
> > months from now)? SECMARK can do everything that the older compat_net
> > controls can do, and it does it with less overhead and a cleaner
> > implementation.
>
> I'd be happy to see it go (conditional checks considered harmful), but a
> good starting point would be to get secmark turned on in Fedora (it was
> still off last I looked) and verify that nothing breaks.
>
> We also don't have any tools capable of managing secmark today; with the
> legacy controls, we could labels ports and netifs via semanage. Only
> secmark userland integration to date has been the basic iptables command
> line support.
Okay RedHat guys ... are there any plans to migrate semanage over to using the
SECMARK controls? If not, what do you need (besides patches to semanage) to
make the transition?
--
paul moore
linux security @ hp
--
This message was distributed to subscribers of the selinux mailing list.
If you no longer wish to subscribe, send mail to majordomo@tycho.nsa.gov with
the words "unsubscribe selinux" without quotes as the message.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: Time to remove compat_net?
2007-08-30 20:33 ` Paul Moore
@ 2007-09-03 15:02 ` Karl MacMillan
2007-09-04 0:37 ` Joshua Brindle
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Karl MacMillan @ 2007-09-03 15:02 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Paul Moore; +Cc: Stephen Smalley, selinux, Eric Paris, James Morris
On Thu, 2007-08-30 at 16:33 -0400, Paul Moore wrote:
> On Thursday, August 30 2007 4:12:24 pm Stephen Smalley wrote:
> > On Thu, 2007-08-30 at 16:07 -0400, Paul Moore wrote:
> > > Does anyone have any objections to placing the compat_net code on the
> > > kernel's "feature removal schedule" (I'd go for removal in 2/2008, six
> > > months from now)? SECMARK can do everything that the older compat_net
> > > controls can do, and it does it with less overhead and a cleaner
> > > implementation.
> >
> > I'd be happy to see it go (conditional checks considered harmful), but a
> > good starting point would be to get secmark turned on in Fedora (it was
> > still off last I looked) and verify that nothing breaks.
> >
> > We also don't have any tools capable of managing secmark today; with the
> > legacy controls, we could labels ports and netifs via semanage. Only
> > secmark userland integration to date has been the basic iptables command
> > line support.
>
> Okay RedHat guys ... are there any plans to migrate semanage over to using the
> SECMARK controls?
I have argued in the past that making semanage handle secmark is the
wrong approach. Basically - the whole point of using secmark is that you
get the full power of iptables. If we force updates through semanage
then you either a) recreate all of iptables in semanage or b) seriously
cripple the mechanism through a restricted interface.
> If not, what do you need (besides patches to semanage) to
> make the transition?
>
What more do you mean other than setting compat_net to 0?
Karl
--
This message was distributed to subscribers of the selinux mailing list.
If you no longer wish to subscribe, send mail to majordomo@tycho.nsa.gov with
the words "unsubscribe selinux" without quotes as the message.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: Time to remove compat_net?
2007-09-03 15:02 ` Karl MacMillan
@ 2007-09-04 0:37 ` Joshua Brindle
2007-09-04 11:38 ` Paul Moore
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Joshua Brindle @ 2007-09-04 0:37 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Karl MacMillan
Cc: Paul Moore, Stephen Smalley, selinux, Eric Paris, James Morris
Karl MacMillan wrote:
> On Thu, 2007-08-30 at 16:33 -0400, Paul Moore wrote:
>
>> On Thursday, August 30 2007 4:12:24 pm Stephen Smalley wrote:
>>
>>> On Thu, 2007-08-30 at 16:07 -0400, Paul Moore wrote:
>>>
>>>> Does anyone have any objections to placing the compat_net code on the
>>>> kernel's "feature removal schedule" (I'd go for removal in 2/2008, six
>>>> months from now)? SECMARK can do everything that the older compat_net
>>>> controls can do, and it does it with less overhead and a cleaner
>>>> implementation.
>>>>
>>> I'd be happy to see it go (conditional checks considered harmful), but a
>>> good starting point would be to get secmark turned on in Fedora (it was
>>> still off last I looked) and verify that nothing breaks.
>>>
>>> We also don't have any tools capable of managing secmark today; with the
>>> legacy controls, we could labels ports and netifs via semanage. Only
>>> secmark userland integration to date has been the basic iptables command
>>> line support.
>>>
>> Okay RedHat guys ... are there any plans to migrate semanage over to using the
>> SECMARK controls?
>>
>
> I have argued in the past that making semanage handle secmark is the
> wrong approach. Basically - the whole point of using secmark is that you
> get the full power of iptables. If we force updates through semanage
> then you either a) recreate all of iptables in semanage or b) seriously
> cripple the mechanism through a restricted interface.
>
>
I completely agree with this.
>> If not, what do you need (besides patches to semanage) to
>> make the transition?
>>
>>
>
> What more do you mean other than setting compat_net to 0?
>
In the past we talked about solving some of the usability problems with
secmark, namely that its difficult to manage the secmark rules
separately from the normal rules without causing issues (like when
running /etc/init.d/iptables stop makes all traffic turn unlabeled and
stop working). One potential solution was to make a new table for
secmark that would be managed differently, we never came to a consensus
here though.
--
This message was distributed to subscribers of the selinux mailing list.
If you no longer wish to subscribe, send mail to majordomo@tycho.nsa.gov with
the words "unsubscribe selinux" without quotes as the message.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: Time to remove compat_net?
2007-09-04 0:37 ` Joshua Brindle
@ 2007-09-04 11:38 ` Paul Moore
0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Paul Moore @ 2007-09-04 11:38 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Joshua Brindle
Cc: Karl MacMillan, Stephen Smalley, selinux, Eric Paris,
James Morris
On Monday 03 September 2007 8:37:31 pm Joshua Brindle wrote:
> Karl MacMillan wrote:
> > On Thu, 2007-08-30 at 16:33 -0400, Paul Moore wrote:
> >> On Thursday, August 30 2007 4:12:24 pm Stephen Smalley wrote:
> >>> On Thu, 2007-08-30 at 16:07 -0400, Paul Moore wrote:
> >>>> Does anyone have any objections to placing the compat_net code on the
> >>>> kernel's "feature removal schedule" (I'd go for removal in 2/2008, six
> >>>> months from now)? SECMARK can do everything that the older compat_net
> >>>> controls can do, and it does it with less overhead and a cleaner
> >>>> implementation.
> >>>
> >>> I'd be happy to see it go (conditional checks considered harmful), but
> >>> a good starting point would be to get secmark turned on in Fedora (it
> >>> was still off last I looked) and verify that nothing breaks.
> >>>
> >>> We also don't have any tools capable of managing secmark today; with
> >>> the legacy controls, we could labels ports and netifs via semanage.
> >>> Only secmark userland integration to date has been the basic iptables
> >>> command line support.
> >>
> >> Okay RedHat guys ... are there any plans to migrate semanage over to
> >> using the SECMARK controls?
> >
> > I have argued in the past that making semanage handle secmark is the
> > wrong approach. Basically - the whole point of using secmark is that you
> > get the full power of iptables. If we force updates through semanage
> > then you either a) recreate all of iptables in semanage or b) seriously
> > cripple the mechanism through a restricted interface.
>
> I completely agree with this.
I agree that does sound reasonable, but isn't there a concern about
compatibility with semanage? Should we provide minimal SECMARK functionality
within semanage just so we can provide compatibility? Or is the real blocker
what you talked about below ...
> >> If not, what do you need (besides patches to semanage) to
> >> make the transition?
> >
> > What more do you mean other than setting compat_net to 0?
>
> In the past we talked about solving some of the usability problems with
> secmark, namely that its difficult to manage the secmark rules
> separately from the normal rules without causing issues (like when
> running /etc/init.d/iptables stop makes all traffic turn unlabeled and
> stop working). One potential solution was to make a new table for
> secmark that would be managed differently, we never came to a consensus
> here though.
Is this the only reason why SECMARK is not garnering much use in
distributions? I suspect a new table would be acceptable upstream and I
don't ever remember hearing much objection to it here; from what I can recall
the only concern was if it was necessary.
--
paul moore
linux security @ hp
--
This message was distributed to subscribers of the selinux mailing list.
If you no longer wish to subscribe, send mail to majordomo@tycho.nsa.gov with
the words "unsubscribe selinux" without quotes as the message.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2007-09-04 11:38 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2007-08-30 20:07 Time to remove compat_net? Paul Moore
2007-08-30 20:12 ` Stephen Smalley
2007-08-30 20:33 ` Paul Moore
2007-09-03 15:02 ` Karl MacMillan
2007-09-04 0:37 ` Joshua Brindle
2007-09-04 11:38 ` Paul Moore
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.