From: Paul Moore <paul@paul-moore.com>
To: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com>
Cc: Eric Paris <eparis@parisplace.org>,
John Stultz <johnstul@us.ibm.com>,
"Serge E. Hallyn" <serge@hallyn.com>,
lkml <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
James Morris <james.l.morris@oracle.com>,
selinux@tycho.nsa.gov, Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>,
john.johansen@canonical.com
Subject: Re: NULL pointer dereference in selinux_ip_postroute_compat
Date: Wed, 08 Aug 2012 16:46:59 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1610114.P5WAdux1ri@sifl> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1344457972.28967.251.camel@edumazet-glaptop>
On Wednesday, August 08, 2012 10:32:52 PM Eric Dumazet wrote:
> On Wed, 2012-08-08 at 22:09 +0200, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> > On Wed, 2012-08-08 at 15:59 -0400, Eric Paris wrote:
> > > Seems wrong. We shouldn't ever need ifdef CONFIG_SECURITY in core
> > > code.
> >
> > Sure but it seems include file misses an accessor for this.
> >
> > We could add it on a future cleanup patch, as Paul mentioned.
>
> I cooked following patch.
> But smack/smack_lsm.c makes a reference to
> smk_of_current()... so it seems we are in a hole...
>
> It makes little sense to me to have any kind of security on this
> internal sockets.
>
> Maybe selinux should not crash if sk->sk_security is NULL ?
I realize our last emails probably passed each other mid-flight, but hopefully
it explains why we can't just pass packets when sk->sk_security is NULL.
Regardless, some quick comments below ...
> diff --git a/security/selinux/hooks.c b/security/selinux/hooks.c
> index 6c77f63..459eca6 100644
> --- a/security/selinux/hooks.c
> +++ b/security/selinux/hooks.c
> @@ -4289,10 +4289,13 @@ out:
> return 0;
> }
>
> -static int selinux_sk_alloc_security(struct sock *sk, int family, ...
> +static int selinux_sk_alloc_security(struct sock *sk, int family, ...
> {
> struct sk_security_struct *sksec;
>
> + if (check && sk->sk_security)
> + return 0;
> +
> sksec = kzalloc(sizeof(*sksec), priority);
> if (!sksec)
> return -ENOMEM;
I think I might replace the "check" boolean with a "kern/kernel" boolean so
that in addition to the allocation we can also initialize the socket to
SECINITSID_KERNEL/kernel_t here in the case when the boolean is set. The only
place that would set the boolean to true would be ip_send_unicast_reply(), all
other callers would set it to false.
> diff --git a/security/smack/smack_lsm.c b/security/smack/smack_lsm.c
> index 8221514..8965cf1 100644
> --- a/security/smack/smack_lsm.c
> +++ b/security/smack/smack_lsm.c
> @@ -1754,11 +1754,14 @@ static void smack_task_to_inode(struct task_struct
> *p, struct inode *inode) *
> * Returns 0 on success, -ENOMEM is there's no memory
> */
> -static int smack_sk_alloc_security(struct sock *sk, int family, gfp_t
> gfp_flags) +static int smack_sk_alloc_security(struct sock *sk, int family,
> gfp_t gfp_flags, bool check) {
> char *csp = smk_of_current();
> struct socket_smack *ssp;
>
> + if (check && sk->sk_security)
> + return 0;
> +
> ssp = kzalloc(sizeof(struct socket_smack), gfp_flags);
> if (ssp == NULL)
> return -ENOMEM;
In the case of Smack, when the kernel boolean is true I think the right
solution is to use smack_net_ambient.
--
paul moore
www.paul-moore.com
--
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.
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Paul Moore <paul@paul-moore.com>
To: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com>
Cc: Eric Paris <eparis@parisplace.org>,
John Stultz <johnstul@us.ibm.com>,
"Serge E. Hallyn" <serge@hallyn.com>,
lkml <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
James Morris <james.l.morris@oracle.com>,
selinux@tycho.nsa.gov, Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>,
john.johansen@canonical.com
Subject: Re: NULL pointer dereference in selinux_ip_postroute_compat
Date: Wed, 08 Aug 2012 16:46:59 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1610114.P5WAdux1ri@sifl> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1344457972.28967.251.camel@edumazet-glaptop>
On Wednesday, August 08, 2012 10:32:52 PM Eric Dumazet wrote:
> On Wed, 2012-08-08 at 22:09 +0200, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> > On Wed, 2012-08-08 at 15:59 -0400, Eric Paris wrote:
> > > Seems wrong. We shouldn't ever need ifdef CONFIG_SECURITY in core
> > > code.
> >
> > Sure but it seems include file misses an accessor for this.
> >
> > We could add it on a future cleanup patch, as Paul mentioned.
>
> I cooked following patch.
> But smack/smack_lsm.c makes a reference to
> smk_of_current()... so it seems we are in a hole...
>
> It makes little sense to me to have any kind of security on this
> internal sockets.
>
> Maybe selinux should not crash if sk->sk_security is NULL ?
I realize our last emails probably passed each other mid-flight, but hopefully
it explains why we can't just pass packets when sk->sk_security is NULL.
Regardless, some quick comments below ...
> diff --git a/security/selinux/hooks.c b/security/selinux/hooks.c
> index 6c77f63..459eca6 100644
> --- a/security/selinux/hooks.c
> +++ b/security/selinux/hooks.c
> @@ -4289,10 +4289,13 @@ out:
> return 0;
> }
>
> -static int selinux_sk_alloc_security(struct sock *sk, int family, ...
> +static int selinux_sk_alloc_security(struct sock *sk, int family, ...
> {
> struct sk_security_struct *sksec;
>
> + if (check && sk->sk_security)
> + return 0;
> +
> sksec = kzalloc(sizeof(*sksec), priority);
> if (!sksec)
> return -ENOMEM;
I think I might replace the "check" boolean with a "kern/kernel" boolean so
that in addition to the allocation we can also initialize the socket to
SECINITSID_KERNEL/kernel_t here in the case when the boolean is set. The only
place that would set the boolean to true would be ip_send_unicast_reply(), all
other callers would set it to false.
> diff --git a/security/smack/smack_lsm.c b/security/smack/smack_lsm.c
> index 8221514..8965cf1 100644
> --- a/security/smack/smack_lsm.c
> +++ b/security/smack/smack_lsm.c
> @@ -1754,11 +1754,14 @@ static void smack_task_to_inode(struct task_struct
> *p, struct inode *inode) *
> * Returns 0 on success, -ENOMEM is there's no memory
> */
> -static int smack_sk_alloc_security(struct sock *sk, int family, gfp_t
> gfp_flags) +static int smack_sk_alloc_security(struct sock *sk, int family,
> gfp_t gfp_flags, bool check) {
> char *csp = smk_of_current();
> struct socket_smack *ssp;
>
> + if (check && sk->sk_security)
> + return 0;
> +
> ssp = kzalloc(sizeof(struct socket_smack), gfp_flags);
> if (ssp == NULL)
> return -ENOMEM;
In the case of Smack, when the kernel boolean is true I think the right
solution is to use smack_net_ambient.
--
paul moore
www.paul-moore.com
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-08-08 20:47 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 71+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-08-07 18:12 NULL pointer dereference in selinux_ip_postroute_compat John Stultz
2012-08-07 21:50 ` Paul Moore
2012-08-07 21:50 ` Paul Moore
2012-08-07 21:58 ` John Stultz
2012-08-07 22:01 ` Paul Moore
2012-08-07 22:01 ` Paul Moore
2012-08-07 22:17 ` Serge E. Hallyn
2012-08-07 22:17 ` Serge E. Hallyn
2012-08-07 22:23 ` Paul Moore
2012-08-07 22:23 ` Paul Moore
2012-08-07 22:37 ` John Stultz
2012-08-08 19:14 ` John Stultz
2012-08-08 19:26 ` Paul Moore
2012-08-08 19:26 ` Paul Moore
2012-08-08 19:38 ` Eric Dumazet
2012-08-08 19:49 ` John Stultz
2012-08-08 20:04 ` Eric Dumazet
2012-08-08 19:50 ` Paul Moore
2012-08-08 19:50 ` Paul Moore
2012-08-08 20:04 ` Eric Dumazet
2012-08-08 19:59 ` Eric Paris
2012-08-08 19:59 ` Eric Paris
2012-08-08 20:09 ` Eric Dumazet
2012-08-08 20:32 ` Eric Dumazet
2012-08-08 20:46 ` Paul Moore [this message]
2012-08-08 20:46 ` Paul Moore
2012-08-08 21:54 ` Eric Dumazet
2012-08-09 0:00 ` Casey Schaufler
2012-08-09 0:00 ` Casey Schaufler
2012-08-09 13:30 ` Paul Moore
2012-08-09 13:30 ` Paul Moore
2012-08-09 14:27 ` Eric Dumazet
2012-08-09 15:04 ` Paul Moore
2012-08-09 15:04 ` Paul Moore
2012-08-09 14:50 ` [PATCH] ipv4: tcp: security_sk_alloc() needed for unicast_sock Eric Dumazet
2012-08-09 15:07 ` Paul Moore
2012-08-09 15:07 ` Paul Moore
2012-08-09 15:36 ` Eric Dumazet
2012-08-09 15:59 ` Paul Moore
2012-08-09 15:59 ` Paul Moore
2012-08-09 16:05 ` Eric Paris
2012-08-09 16:05 ` Eric Paris
2012-08-09 16:09 ` Paul Moore
2012-08-09 16:09 ` Paul Moore
2012-08-09 17:46 ` Eric Dumazet
2012-08-09 20:06 ` Eric Paris
2012-08-09 20:19 ` Paul Moore
2012-08-09 20:19 ` Paul Moore
2012-08-09 20:19 ` Paul Moore
2012-08-09 21:29 ` Eric Dumazet
2012-08-09 21:53 ` Casey Schaufler
2012-08-09 21:53 ` Casey Schaufler
2012-08-09 22:05 ` Eric Dumazet
2012-08-09 22:26 ` Casey Schaufler
2012-08-09 22:26 ` Casey Schaufler
2012-08-09 22:26 ` Casey Schaufler
2012-08-09 23:38 ` David Miller
2012-08-09 23:56 ` [PATCH] ipv4: tcp: unicast_sock should not land outside of TCP stack Eric Dumazet
2012-08-10 4:05 ` David Miller
2012-08-08 20:35 ` NULL pointer dereference in selinux_ip_postroute_compat Paul Moore
2012-08-08 20:35 ` Paul Moore
2012-08-08 20:51 ` Eric Paris
2012-08-08 20:51 ` Eric Paris
2012-08-08 21:03 ` Paul Moore
2012-08-08 21:03 ` Paul Moore
2012-08-08 21:09 ` Eric Paris
2012-08-08 21:09 ` Eric Paris
2012-08-08 19:29 ` Eric Dumazet
2012-08-08 16:58 ` John Johansen
2012-08-07 22:26 ` John Stultz
2012-08-07 22:31 ` John Stultz
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1610114.P5WAdux1ri@sifl \
--to=paul@paul-moore.com \
--cc=edumazet@google.com \
--cc=eparis@parisplace.org \
--cc=eric.dumazet@gmail.com \
--cc=james.l.morris@oracle.com \
--cc=john.johansen@canonical.com \
--cc=johnstul@us.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=selinux@tycho.nsa.gov \
--cc=serge@hallyn.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
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.