From: Paul Moore <paul.moore@hp.com>
To: selinux@tycho.nsa.gov
Subject: The problem with TUN/TAP devices
Date: Tue, 30 Jun 2009 17:34:31 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <200906301734.31986.paul.moore@hp.com> (raw)
Unfortunately we have a problem with the network access controls and TUN/TAP
devices. The basic issue is that packets entering the stack via a TUN device,
e.g. QEMU/KVM guest instance operating with a bridged network configuration,
do not have a fully initialized sock associated with them. I say "fully
initialized" because the basic initialization has been done (memory allocated,
initial values set to SECINITSID_UNLABELED, etc.) but the last step where we
assign the sock a label/SID never happens. Why? Because the TUN driver code
only calls sk_alloc() and nothing else in the TUN code paths finish the
SELinux sock setup.
Okay, so what? Well, the problem is that the SELinux IP postrouting code
treats the packet's sock label (the one that is still set as unlabeled_t in
the TUN case) as the originating peer label; in short it looks like packets
sent from your QEMU/KVM instance are unlabeled_t instead of my_guest_t:s3.
Needless to say this is not ideal.
So how do we fix it? Well, there are a two options that I can think of right
now (feel free to add to the list):
1. Set the sock's label/SID in sk_alloc()
2. Introduce a new hook to set the label/SID of a sock and call it from
tun_set_iff()
The problem with #2 is that it introduces a new (basically TUN specific) hook
to do something silly. Important, but still kinda silly. The problem with #1
is that we currently set the sock's label/SID in selinux_socket_post_create()
and match it with the inode's label/SID which has the potential to get ugly (I
haven't verified all of those cases yet). However, there may be an
alternative, call it #1a, where set label the sock in sk_alloc() and then use
the sock's label to set the inode's label in socket_post_create(); this should
solve the potential ugliness.
Thoughts?
There is also a somewhat related issue involving persistent TUN/TAP devices
but I'd like to resolve this before getting deeper into that problem.
--
paul moore
linux @ 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.
next reply other threads:[~2009-06-30 21:35 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-06-30 21:34 Paul Moore [this message]
2009-06-30 22:19 ` The problem with TUN/TAP devices James Morris
2009-07-01 15:06 ` Paul Moore
2009-07-01 3:32 ` Casey Schaufler
2009-07-01 15:11 ` Paul Moore
2009-07-01 13:44 ` Stephen Smalley
2009-07-01 15:01 ` Eric Paris
2009-07-01 15:06 ` Stephen Smalley
2009-07-01 15:19 ` Paul Moore
2009-07-01 15:42 ` Stephen Smalley
2009-07-01 16:34 ` Paul Moore
2009-07-01 22:42 ` James Morris
2009-07-01 22:58 ` Paul Moore
2009-07-01 23:53 ` James Morris
2009-07-02 16:58 ` Paul Moore
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=200906301734.31986.paul.moore@hp.com \
--to=paul.moore@hp.com \
--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.