From: "Serge E. Hallyn" <serue@us.ibm.com>
To: Stephen Smalley <sds@epoch.ncsc.mil>
Cc: Linux Containers <containers@lists.osdl.org>,
linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org,
SELinux <selinux@tycho.nsa.gov>,
Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@gmail.com>,
Casey Schaufler <casey@schaufler-ca.com>,
Andrew Morgan <morgan@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] cr: lsm: restore LSM contexts for ipc objects
Date: Thu, 25 Jun 2009 07:59:36 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090625125936.GA30349@us.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1245933275.9669.100.camel@moss-pluto.epoch.ncsc.mil>
Quoting Stephen Smalley (sds@epoch.ncsc.mil):
> On Wed, 2009-06-24 at 17:07 -0500, Serge E. Hallyn wrote:
> > Oh, no. I wasn't thinking right.
> >
> > The objects are actually restored through calls to do_shmget() etc,
> > so that security_xyz_alloc() already gets called.
>
> Does this mean that the objects temporarily exist in the wrong security
> context and are accessible to other threads during the interval between
> creation and when they get "restored" to the right security context?
They get restored in a private IPC namespace so they aren't accessible
to any live tasks. Also, the objects will be created using the default
context for the program doing sys_restore(), running as app_restore_t or
something, so presumably a policy could ensure that such temporary
objects aren't readable by anyone else, just in case something goes
wrong before the security_ipcxyz_restore(), right?
-serge
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: "Serge E. Hallyn" <serue@us.ibm.com>
To: Stephen Smalley <sds@epoch.ncsc.mil>
Cc: Linux Containers <containers@lists.osdl.org>,
linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org,
SELinux <selinux@tycho.nsa.gov>,
Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@gmail.com>,
Casey Schaufler <casey@schaufler-ca.com>,
Andrew Morgan <morgan@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] cr: lsm: restore LSM contexts for ipc objects
Date: Thu, 25 Jun 2009 07:59:36 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090625125936.GA30349@us.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1245933275.9669.100.camel@moss-pluto.epoch.ncsc.mil>
Quoting Stephen Smalley (sds@epoch.ncsc.mil):
> On Wed, 2009-06-24 at 17:07 -0500, Serge E. Hallyn wrote:
> > Oh, no. I wasn't thinking right.
> >
> > The objects are actually restored through calls to do_shmget() etc,
> > so that security_xyz_alloc() already gets called.
>
> Does this mean that the objects temporarily exist in the wrong security
> context and are accessible to other threads during the interval between
> creation and when they get "restored" to the right security context?
They get restored in a private IPC namespace so they aren't accessible
to any live tasks. Also, the objects will be created using the default
context for the program doing sys_restore(), running as app_restore_t or
something, so presumably a policy could ensure that such temporary
objects aren't readable by anyone else, just in case something goes
wrong before the security_ipcxyz_restore(), right?
-serge
--
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.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-06-25 12:59 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 31+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-06-20 1:32 [PATCH 1/1] cr: lsm: restore LSM contexts for ipc objects Serge E. Hallyn
2009-06-20 1:32 ` Serge E. Hallyn
2009-06-22 5:37 ` James Morris
2009-06-22 5:37 ` James Morris
2009-06-22 16:25 ` Serge E. Hallyn
2009-06-22 16:25 ` Serge E. Hallyn
[not found] ` <20090620013216.GA4435-r/Jw6+rmf7HQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>
2009-06-22 14:47 ` Stephen Smalley
2009-06-22 14:47 ` Stephen Smalley
2009-06-22 17:50 ` Serge E. Hallyn
2009-06-22 17:50 ` Serge E. Hallyn
2009-06-22 18:23 ` Stephen Smalley
2009-06-22 18:23 ` Stephen Smalley
2009-06-23 3:10 ` Casey Schaufler
2009-06-23 3:10 ` Casey Schaufler
2009-06-23 17:55 ` Stephen Smalley
2009-06-23 17:55 ` Stephen Smalley
2009-06-23 18:18 ` Serge E. Hallyn
2009-06-23 18:18 ` Serge E. Hallyn
2009-06-23 19:57 ` Serge E. Hallyn
2009-06-23 19:57 ` Serge E. Hallyn
2009-06-24 13:10 ` Stephen Smalley
2009-06-24 13:10 ` Stephen Smalley
2009-06-24 22:07 ` Serge E. Hallyn
2009-06-24 22:07 ` Serge E. Hallyn
2009-06-25 12:34 ` Stephen Smalley
2009-06-25 12:34 ` Stephen Smalley
2009-06-25 12:59 ` Serge E. Hallyn [this message]
2009-06-25 12:59 ` Serge E. Hallyn
2009-06-25 14:06 ` Stephen Smalley
2009-06-25 14:06 ` Stephen Smalley
2009-06-25 4:21 ` Oren Laadan
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=20090625125936.GA30349@us.ibm.com \
--to=serue@us.ibm.com \
--cc=adobriyan@gmail.com \
--cc=casey@schaufler-ca.com \
--cc=containers@lists.osdl.org \
--cc=linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=morgan@kernel.org \
--cc=sds@epoch.ncsc.mil \
--cc=selinux@tycho.nsa.gov \
/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.