From: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
To: Casey Schaufler <casey@schaufler-ca.com>
Cc: casey.schaufler@intel.com, jmorris@namei.org,
linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org, selinux@vger.kernel.org,
john.johansen@canonical.com, penguin-kernel@i-love.sakura.ne.jp,
paul@paul-moore.com, sds@tycho.nsa.gov
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 05/25] Use lsmblob in security_audit_rule_match
Date: Tue, 18 Jun 2019 21:55:57 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <201906182154.E9766F5@keescook> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190618230551.7475-6-casey@schaufler-ca.com>
On Tue, Jun 18, 2019 at 04:05:31PM -0700, Casey Schaufler wrote:
> Change the secid parameter of security_audit_rule_match
> to a lsmblob structure pointer. Pass the entry from the
> lsmblob structure for the approprite slot to the LSM hook.
>
> Change the users of security_audit_rule_match to use the
> lsmblob instead of a u32. In some cases this requires a
> temporary conversion using lsmblob_init() that will go
> away when other interfaces get converted.
I like this much better with the LSM-infrastructure "slot" logic.
I do think it's be easier to read if the lsmblob instances were called
"blob" instead of "le" and "l"...
-Kees
>
> Signed-off-by: Casey Schaufler <casey@schaufler-ca.com>
> ---
> include/linux/security.h | 7 ++++---
> kernel/auditfilter.c | 4 +++-
> kernel/auditsc.c | 13 +++++++++----
> security/integrity/ima/ima.h | 4 ++--
> security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c | 7 +++++--
> security/security.c | 14 ++++++++++++--
> 6 files changed, 35 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/include/linux/security.h b/include/linux/security.h
> index 28d074866895..067fabc63e51 100644
> --- a/include/linux/security.h
> +++ b/include/linux/security.h
> @@ -1757,7 +1757,8 @@ static inline int security_key_getsecurity(struct key *key, char **_buffer)
> #ifdef CONFIG_SECURITY
> int security_audit_rule_init(u32 field, u32 op, char *rulestr, void **lsmrule);
> int security_audit_rule_known(struct audit_krule *krule);
> -int security_audit_rule_match(u32 secid, u32 field, u32 op, void *lsmrule);
> +int security_audit_rule_match(struct lsmblob *l, u32 field, u32 op,
> + void *lsmrule);
> void security_audit_rule_free(void *lsmrule);
>
> #else
> @@ -1773,8 +1774,8 @@ static inline int security_audit_rule_known(struct audit_krule *krule)
> return 0;
> }
>
> -static inline int security_audit_rule_match(u32 secid, u32 field, u32 op,
> - void *lsmrule)
> +static inline int security_audit_rule_match(struct lsmblob *l, u32 field,
> + u32 op, void *lsmrule)
> {
> return 0;
> }
> diff --git a/kernel/auditfilter.c b/kernel/auditfilter.c
> index 63f8b3f26fab..934ceae1ff70 100644
> --- a/kernel/auditfilter.c
> +++ b/kernel/auditfilter.c
> @@ -1324,6 +1324,7 @@ int audit_filter(int msgtype, unsigned int listtype)
> struct audit_field *f = &e->rule.fields[i];
> pid_t pid;
> u32 sid;
> + struct lsmblob le;
>
> switch (f->type) {
> case AUDIT_PID:
> @@ -1354,7 +1355,8 @@ int audit_filter(int msgtype, unsigned int listtype)
> case AUDIT_SUBJ_CLR:
> if (f->lsm_rule) {
> security_task_getsecid(current, &sid);
> - result = security_audit_rule_match(sid,
> + lsmblob_init(&le, sid);
> + result = security_audit_rule_match(&le,
> f->type, f->op, f->lsm_rule);
> }
> break;
> diff --git a/kernel/auditsc.c b/kernel/auditsc.c
> index d1eab1d4a930..93c74205ef40 100644
> --- a/kernel/auditsc.c
> +++ b/kernel/auditsc.c
> @@ -445,6 +445,7 @@ static int audit_filter_rules(struct task_struct *tsk,
> const struct cred *cred;
> int i, need_sid = 1;
> u32 sid;
> + struct lsmblob le;
> unsigned int sessionid;
>
> cred = rcu_dereference_check(tsk->cred, tsk == current || task_creation);
> @@ -630,7 +631,8 @@ static int audit_filter_rules(struct task_struct *tsk,
> security_task_getsecid(tsk, &sid);
> need_sid = 0;
> }
> - result = security_audit_rule_match(sid, f->type,
> + lsmblob_init(&le, sid);
> + result = security_audit_rule_match(&le, f->type,
> f->op,
> f->lsm_rule);
> }
> @@ -645,15 +647,17 @@ static int audit_filter_rules(struct task_struct *tsk,
> if (f->lsm_rule) {
> /* Find files that match */
> if (name) {
> + lsmblob_init(&le, name->osid);
> result = security_audit_rule_match(
> - name->osid,
> + &le,
> f->type,
> f->op,
> f->lsm_rule);
> } else if (ctx) {
> list_for_each_entry(n, &ctx->names_list, list) {
> + lsmblob_init(&le, n->osid);
> if (security_audit_rule_match(
> - n->osid,
> + &le,
> f->type,
> f->op,
> f->lsm_rule)) {
> @@ -665,7 +669,8 @@ static int audit_filter_rules(struct task_struct *tsk,
> /* Find ipc objects that match */
> if (!ctx || ctx->type != AUDIT_IPC)
> break;
> - if (security_audit_rule_match(ctx->ipc.osid,
> + lsmblob_init(&le, ctx->ipc.osid);
> + if (security_audit_rule_match(&le,
> f->type, f->op,
> f->lsm_rule))
> ++result;
> diff --git a/security/integrity/ima/ima.h b/security/integrity/ima/ima.h
> index d213e835c498..fe5e921d621d 100644
> --- a/security/integrity/ima/ima.h
> +++ b/security/integrity/ima/ima.h
> @@ -307,8 +307,8 @@ static inline int security_filter_rule_init(u32 field, u32 op, char *rulestr,
> return -EINVAL;
> }
>
> -static inline int security_filter_rule_match(u32 secid, u32 field, u32 op,
> - void *lsmrule)
> +static inline int security_filter_rule_match(struct lsmblob *l, u32 field,
> + u32 op, void *lsmrule)
> {
> return -EINVAL;
> }
> diff --git a/security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c b/security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c
> index e0cc323f948f..ae525a89e07f 100644
> --- a/security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c
> +++ b/security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c
> @@ -327,6 +327,7 @@ static bool ima_match_rules(struct ima_rule_entry *rule, struct inode *inode,
> for (i = 0; i < MAX_LSM_RULES; i++) {
> int rc = 0;
> u32 osid;
> + struct lsmblob le;
> int retried = 0;
>
> if (!rule->lsm[i].rule)
> @@ -337,7 +338,8 @@ static bool ima_match_rules(struct ima_rule_entry *rule, struct inode *inode,
> case LSM_OBJ_ROLE:
> case LSM_OBJ_TYPE:
> security_inode_getsecid(inode, &osid);
> - rc = security_filter_rule_match(osid,
> + lsmblob_init(&le, osid);
> + rc = security_filter_rule_match(&le,
> rule->lsm[i].type,
> Audit_equal,
> rule->lsm[i].rule);
> @@ -345,7 +347,8 @@ static bool ima_match_rules(struct ima_rule_entry *rule, struct inode *inode,
> case LSM_SUBJ_USER:
> case LSM_SUBJ_ROLE:
> case LSM_SUBJ_TYPE:
> - rc = security_filter_rule_match(secid,
> + lsmblob_init(&le, secid);
> + rc = security_filter_rule_match(&le,
> rule->lsm[i].type,
> Audit_equal,
> rule->lsm[i].rule);
> diff --git a/security/security.c b/security/security.c
> index 5aa3c052d702..45541053df89 100644
> --- a/security/security.c
> +++ b/security/security.c
> @@ -2447,9 +2447,19 @@ void security_audit_rule_free(void *lsmrule)
> call_void_hook(audit_rule_free, lsmrule);
> }
>
> -int security_audit_rule_match(u32 secid, u32 field, u32 op, void *lsmrule)
> +int security_audit_rule_match(struct lsmblob *l, u32 field, u32 op,
> + void *lsmrule)
> {
> - return call_int_hook(audit_rule_match, 0, secid, field, op, lsmrule);
> + struct security_hook_list *hp;
> + int rc;
> +
> + hlist_for_each_entry(hp, &security_hook_heads.audit_rule_match, list) {
> + rc = hp->hook.audit_rule_match(l->secid[hp->slot], field,
> + op, lsmrule);
> + if (rc != 0)
> + return rc;
> + }
> + return 0;
> }
> #endif /* CONFIG_AUDIT */
>
> --
> 2.20.1
>
--
Kees Cook
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-06-19 4:56 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 53+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-06-18 23:05 [PATCH v2 00/25] LSM: Module stacking for AppArmor Casey Schaufler
2019-06-18 23:05 ` [PATCH v2 01/25] LSM: Infrastructure management of the superblock Casey Schaufler
2019-06-18 23:05 ` [PATCH v2 02/25] LSM: Infrastructure management of the sock security Casey Schaufler
2019-06-18 23:05 ` [PATCH v2 03/25] LSM: Infrastructure management of the key blob Casey Schaufler
2019-06-18 23:05 ` [PATCH v2 04/25] LSM: Create and manage the lsmblob data structure Casey Schaufler
2019-06-19 4:52 ` Kees Cook
2019-06-19 6:17 ` Kees Cook
2019-06-19 16:34 ` Casey Schaufler
2019-06-18 23:05 ` [PATCH v2 05/25] Use lsmblob in security_audit_rule_match Casey Schaufler
2019-06-19 4:55 ` Kees Cook [this message]
2019-06-18 23:05 ` [PATCH v2 06/25] LSM: Use lsmblob in security_kernel_act_as Casey Schaufler
2019-06-18 23:05 ` [PATCH v2 07/25] net: Prepare UDS for secuirty module stacking Casey Schaufler
2019-06-19 4:59 ` Kees Cook
2019-06-19 16:42 ` Casey Schaufler
2019-06-18 23:05 ` [PATCH v2 08/25] LSM: Use lsmblob in security_secctx_to_secid Casey Schaufler
2019-06-18 23:05 ` [PATCH v2 09/25] LSM: Use lsmblob in security_secid_to_secctx Casey Schaufler
2019-06-19 5:03 ` Kees Cook
2019-06-18 23:05 ` [PATCH v2 10/25] LSM: Use lsmblob in security_ipc_getsecid Casey Schaufler
2019-06-18 23:05 ` [PATCH v2 11/25] LSM: Use lsmblob in security_task_getsecid Casey Schaufler
2019-06-18 23:05 ` [PATCH v2 12/25] LSM: Use lsmblob in security_inode_getsecid Casey Schaufler
2019-06-18 23:05 ` [PATCH v2 13/25] LSM: Use lsmblob in security_cred_getsecid Casey Schaufler
2019-06-19 5:11 ` Kees Cook
2019-06-18 23:05 ` [PATCH v2 14/25] IMA: Change internal interfaces to use lsmblobs Casey Schaufler
2019-06-18 23:05 ` [PATCH v2 15/25] LSM: Specify which LSM to display Casey Schaufler
2019-06-19 4:33 ` Kees Cook
2019-06-19 15:33 ` Casey Schaufler
2019-06-19 5:28 ` Kees Cook
2019-06-19 17:00 ` Casey Schaufler
2019-06-18 23:05 ` [PATCH v2 16/25] LSM: Ensure the correct LSM context releaser Casey Schaufler
2019-06-19 5:34 ` Kees Cook
2019-06-19 17:10 ` Casey Schaufler
2019-06-18 23:05 ` [PATCH v2 17/25] LSM: Use lsmcontext in security_secid_to_secctx Casey Schaufler
2019-06-19 5:36 ` Kees Cook
2019-06-18 23:05 ` [PATCH v2 18/25] LSM: Use lsmcontext in security_dentry_init_security Casey Schaufler
2019-06-19 5:41 ` Kees Cook
2019-06-19 17:31 ` Casey Schaufler
2019-06-20 17:25 ` Kees Cook
2019-06-18 23:05 ` [PATCH v2 19/25] LSM: Use lsmcontext in security_inode_getsecctx Casey Schaufler
2019-06-18 23:05 ` [PATCH v2 20/25] LSM: security_secid_to_secctx in netlink netfilter Casey Schaufler
2019-06-18 23:05 ` [PATCH v2 21/25] Audit: Store LSM audit information in an lsmblob Casey Schaufler
2019-06-18 23:05 ` [PATCH v2 22/25] LSM: Return the lsmblob slot on initialization Casey Schaufler
2019-06-18 23:05 ` [PATCH v2 23/25] NET: Store LSM netlabel data in a lsmblob Casey Schaufler
2019-06-18 23:05 ` [PATCH v2 24/25] Fix slotted list and getpeersec_d Casey Schaufler
2019-06-19 5:50 ` Kees Cook
2019-06-19 17:36 ` Casey Schaufler
2019-06-18 23:05 ` [PATCH v2 25/25] AppArmor: Remove the exclusive flag Casey Schaufler
2019-06-19 4:34 ` [PATCH v2 00/25] LSM: Module stacking for AppArmor Kees Cook
2019-06-19 15:39 ` Casey Schaufler
2019-06-19 20:08 ` James Morris
2019-06-20 17:33 ` Stacked LSMs (was Re: [PATCH v2 00/25] LSM: Module stacking for AppArmor) Kees Cook
2019-06-22 14:15 ` Mickaël Salaün
2019-06-19 5:21 ` [PATCH v2 00/25] LSM: Module stacking for AppArmor Kees Cook
2019-06-19 16:48 ` Casey Schaufler
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=201906182154.E9766F5@keescook \
--to=keescook@chromium.org \
--cc=casey.schaufler@intel.com \
--cc=casey@schaufler-ca.com \
--cc=jmorris@namei.org \
--cc=john.johansen@canonical.com \
--cc=linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=paul@paul-moore.com \
--cc=penguin-kernel@i-love.sakura.ne.jp \
--cc=sds@tycho.nsa.gov \
--cc=selinux@vger.kernel.org \
/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.