All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Russell Coker <russell@coker.com.au>
To: Topi Miettinen <toiwoton@gmail.com>
Cc: selinux-refpolicy@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Access to raw memory: remove or make boolean?
Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2020 02:42:58 +1100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <2111138.8pYWFqxgyc@xev> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <11011d01-844e-c526-a85f-92a7fc985d16@gmail.com>

On Tuesday, 25 February 2020 2:11:46 AM AEDT Topi Miettinen wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> I made a PR 192 (https://github.com/SELinuxProject/refpolicy/pull/192)
> for introducing a new boolean to disable access to raw memory devices
> (/dev/mem, /dev/kmem, /dev/mergemem, dev/oldmem, /dev/port) because on
> modern systems, direct access shouldn't be needed anymore. Chris
> PeBenito asked to propose to this list whether instead of boolean, the
> access should be removed unconditionally if it's no longer needed. I
> think boolean could be useful for those systems where this is still
> needed but still use latest reference policy.

https://lwn.net/Articles/147901/

A quick search turned up the above article from 2005 debating whether /dev/
kmem was of any use then.

./admin/ddcprobe.te:dev_read_raw_memory(ddcprobe_t)
./admin/ddcprobe.te:dev_wx_raw_memory(ddcprobe_t)
./admin/dmidecode.te:dev_read_raw_memory(dmidecode_t)
./admin/kudzu.te:dev_rx_raw_memory(kudzu_t)
./admin/kudzu.te:dev_wx_raw_memory(kudzu_t)
./admin/mcelog.te:dev_read_raw_memory(mcelog_t)
./admin/rpm.te:dev_read_raw_memory(rpm_t)
./admin/sosreport.te:dev_read_raw_memory(sosreport_t)
./admin/tboot.te:dev_read_raw_memory(txtstat_t)
./admin/vbetool.te:dev_wx_raw_memory(vbetool_t)
./admin/vbetool.te:dev_read_raw_memory(vbetool_t)
./apps/vmware.te:dev_read_raw_memory(vmware_t)
./apps/vmware.te:dev_write_raw_memory(vmware_t)
./services/hal.te:dev_read_raw_memory(hald_t)
./services/hal.te:dev_read_raw_memory(hald_mac_t)
./services/hal.te:dev_write_raw_memory(hald_mac_t)
./services/devicekit.te:        dev_read_raw_memory(devicekit_disk_t)
./services/colord.te:dev_read_raw_memory(colord_t)
./services/colord.te:dev_write_raw_memory(colord_t)
./services/xserver.te:dev_read_raw_memory(xserver_t)
./services/xserver.te:dev_wx_raw_memory(xserver_t)
./system/iscsi.te:dev_read_raw_memory(iscsid_t)
./system/iscsi.te:dev_write_raw_memory(iscsid_t)
./system/raid.te:dev_read_raw_memory(mdadm_t)
./system/init.te:       dev_rx_raw_memory(initrc_t)
./system/init.te:       dev_wx_raw_memory(initrc_t)
./system/logging.te:dev_read_raw_memory(klogd_t)

A quick grep of the latest policy turned up the above access to /dev/mem.  Do 
ddcprobe_t, vbetool_t, and the X server still do that?  mcelog_t, and klogd_t 
might have good uses, as might sosreport_t (don't even know what it does but 
guessing it's like klogd_t).  rpm_t should maybe transition to a different 
domain for whatever it was doing and the same for kudzo_t.  Vmware  is a bit 
ugly, so vmware_t might actually do that.  iscsi_t, mdadm_t, colord_t, and 
initrc_t should never have needed that.  hald_t, hald_mac_t and 
devicekit_disk_t might have needed it, but hopefully that was fixed a long 
time ago.

Interestingly bootloader_t doesn't have such access even though a quick 
inspection of the LILO source code shows that it still probes the boot order 
by directly reading the BIOS memory.  I guess no-one uses LILO with SE Linux.

-- 
My Main Blog         http://etbe.coker.com.au/
My Documents Blog    http://doc.coker.com.au/


  reply	other threads:[~2020-02-24 15:43 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-02-24 15:11 Access to raw memory: remove or make boolean? Topi Miettinen
2020-02-24 15:42 ` Russell Coker [this message]
2020-02-24 15:56   ` Topi Miettinen
2020-02-25  0:27     ` Russell Coker
2020-02-25  8:54       ` Topi Miettinen

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=2111138.8pYWFqxgyc@xev \
    --to=russell@coker.com.au \
    --cc=selinux-refpolicy@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=toiwoton@gmail.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.