All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>
To: Stephen Smalley <sds@tycho.nsa.gov>
Cc: aviro@redhat.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	selinux@tycho.nsa.gov, chrisw@sous-sol.org, jmorris@namei.org
Subject: Re: Security issues with local filesystem caching
Date: Thu, 26 Oct 2006 23:53:20 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <2340.1161903200@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1161884706.16681.270.camel@moss-spartans.epoch.ncsc.mil>

Stephen Smalley <sds@tycho.nsa.gov> wrote:

> When the daemon writes the context value (a string) to the cachefiles
> module interface for a given cache, the cachefiles module would do
> something like the following:

This looks reasonable.

> SELinux would then provide selinux_secctx_to_secid() and
> selinux_cache_set_context() implementations; the former would just be call to
> selinux_string_to_sid(),

That sounds fairly easy.

> while the latter would require some new permission check to be defined
> unless we can treat this as equivalent to some existing operation.

So what does this actually check?  I assume it checks that the process's
current context permits the use of the specified secid in this snippet:

	/* Check permission of current to set this context. */
	rc = security_cache_set_context(secid);

> You'll find that there is already a security_secid_to_secctx() hook defined
> for LSM, so the first hook just adds the other direction.

Okay.

> 	cache->secid = secid;

I was wondering if the cache struct should have a "void *security" that the LSM
modules can set, free and assert temporarily, but this sounds like it will do.

> Later, when going to create a file in that cache, the cachefiles module
> would do something like:
> 	/* Save and switch the fs secid for creation. */
> 	fssecid = security_getfssecid();
> 	security_setfssecid(cache->secid);
> 	<create file>
> 	/* Restore the original fs secid. */
> 	security_setfssecid(fssecid);
> SELinux would then provide selinux_getfsecid() and selinux_setfssecid()
> implementations that are just:
> 	u32 selinux_getfssecid(void)
> 	{
> 		struct task_security_struct *tsec = current->security;
> 		return tsec->create_sid;
> 	}
> 	void selinux_setfssecid(u32 secid)
> 	{
> 		struct task_security_struct *tsec = current->security;
> 		tsec->create_sid = secid;
> 	}

That sounds doable.  I presume I should attend to fsuid/fsgid myself, much as
I'm doing now?

David

--
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: David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>
To: Stephen Smalley <sds@tycho.nsa.gov>
Cc: aviro@redhat.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	selinux@tycho.nsa.gov, chrisw@sous-sol.org, jmorris@namei.org
Subject: Re: Security issues with local filesystem caching
Date: Thu, 26 Oct 2006 23:53:20 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <2340.1161903200@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1161884706.16681.270.camel@moss-spartans.epoch.ncsc.mil>

Stephen Smalley <sds@tycho.nsa.gov> wrote:

> When the daemon writes the context value (a string) to the cachefiles
> module interface for a given cache, the cachefiles module would do
> something like the following:

This looks reasonable.

> SELinux would then provide selinux_secctx_to_secid() and
> selinux_cache_set_context() implementations; the former would just be call to
> selinux_string_to_sid(),

That sounds fairly easy.

> while the latter would require some new permission check to be defined
> unless we can treat this as equivalent to some existing operation.

So what does this actually check?  I assume it checks that the process's
current context permits the use of the specified secid in this snippet:

	/* Check permission of current to set this context. */
	rc = security_cache_set_context(secid);

> You'll find that there is already a security_secid_to_secctx() hook defined
> for LSM, so the first hook just adds the other direction.

Okay.

> 	cache->secid = secid;

I was wondering if the cache struct should have a "void *security" that the LSM
modules can set, free and assert temporarily, but this sounds like it will do.

> Later, when going to create a file in that cache, the cachefiles module
> would do something like:
> 	/* Save and switch the fs secid for creation. */
> 	fssecid = security_getfssecid();
> 	security_setfssecid(cache->secid);
> 	<create file>
> 	/* Restore the original fs secid. */
> 	security_setfssecid(fssecid);
> SELinux would then provide selinux_getfsecid() and selinux_setfssecid()
> implementations that are just:
> 	u32 selinux_getfssecid(void)
> 	{
> 		struct task_security_struct *tsec = current->security;
> 		return tsec->create_sid;
> 	}
> 	void selinux_setfssecid(u32 secid)
> 	{
> 		struct task_security_struct *tsec = current->security;
> 		tsec->create_sid = secid;
> 	}

That sounds doable.  I presume I should attend to fsuid/fsgid myself, much as
I'm doing now?

David

  reply	other threads:[~2006-10-26 22:53 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 105+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2006-10-25 10:14 Security issues with local filesystem caching David Howells
2006-10-25 10:14 ` David Howells
2006-10-25 16:52 ` Nate Diller
2006-10-25 16:52   ` Nate Diller
2006-10-25 16:48   ` Jeff V. Merkey
2006-10-25 17:21     ` David Howells
2006-10-25 17:21       ` David Howells
2006-10-25 17:42       ` Jeff V. Merkey
2006-10-25 18:15         ` David Howells
2006-10-25 18:15           ` David Howells
2006-10-25 20:21 ` Josef Sipek
2006-10-25 20:28   ` Josef Sipek
2006-10-26  9:56   ` David Howells
2006-10-26  9:56     ` David Howells
2006-10-27 15:54     ` Josef Sipek
2006-10-25 21:12 ` Stephen Smalley
2006-10-25 21:12   ` Stephen Smalley
2006-10-26 10:40   ` David Howells
2006-10-26 10:40     ` David Howells
2006-10-26 12:51     ` Stephen Smalley
2006-10-26 12:51       ` Stephen Smalley
2006-10-26 16:04       ` David Howells
2006-10-26 16:04         ` David Howells
2006-10-26 16:34         ` Stephen Smalley
2006-10-26 16:34           ` Stephen Smalley
2006-10-26 17:09           ` David Howells
2006-10-26 17:09             ` David Howells
2006-10-26 17:45             ` Stephen Smalley
2006-10-26 17:45               ` Stephen Smalley
2006-10-26 22:53               ` David Howells [this message]
2006-10-26 22:53                 ` David Howells
2006-10-27 14:48                 ` Stephen Smalley
2006-10-27 14:48                   ` Stephen Smalley
2006-10-27 15:42                   ` David Howells
2006-10-27 15:42                     ` David Howells
2006-10-27 16:10                     ` Stephen Smalley
2006-10-27 16:10                       ` Stephen Smalley
2006-10-27 16:25                       ` David Howells
2006-10-27 16:25                         ` David Howells
2006-10-27 17:09                         ` Stephen Smalley
2006-10-27 17:09                           ` Stephen Smalley
2006-10-27 17:34                           ` David Howells
2006-10-27 17:34                             ` David Howells
2006-10-27 14:41               ` David Howells
2006-10-27 14:41                 ` David Howells
2006-10-27 15:03                 ` Stephen Smalley
2006-10-27 16:12                   ` David Howells
2006-10-27 16:37                     ` Stephen Smalley
2006-10-27 17:28                       ` David Howells
2006-10-27 18:10                         ` Stephen Smalley
2006-10-30 15:13                           ` David Howells
2006-10-31 16:19                           ` David Howells
2006-10-31 16:51                             ` Stephen Smalley
2006-10-31 19:21                               ` David Howells
2006-10-25 23:37 ` Alan Cox
2006-10-26  0:32   ` Al Viro
2006-10-26 10:45     ` David Howells
2006-10-26 10:45       ` David Howells
2006-10-26 10:54     ` Alan Cox
2006-10-26  9:14 ` Jan Dittmer
2006-10-26 10:55   ` David Howells
2006-10-26 10:55     ` David Howells
2006-10-26 11:52   ` Alan Cox
2006-10-31 21:26 ` David Howells
2006-10-31 21:26   ` David Howells
2006-11-01 13:28   ` Stephen Smalley
2006-11-01 13:28     ` Stephen Smalley
2006-11-01 15:34     ` David Howells
2006-11-01 15:34       ` David Howells
2006-11-01 15:58       ` Karl MacMillan
2006-11-01 15:58         ` Karl MacMillan
2006-11-01 17:45         ` Stephen Smalley
2006-11-01 17:45           ` Stephen Smalley
2006-11-02 16:29           ` Karl MacMillan
2006-11-02 16:29             ` Karl MacMillan
2006-11-02 18:04             ` Stephen Smalley
2006-11-02 18:04               ` Stephen Smalley
2006-11-01 17:30       ` Stephen Smalley
2006-11-01 17:30         ` Stephen Smalley
2006-11-02 17:16         ` David Howells
2006-11-02 17:16           ` David Howells
2006-11-02 19:49           ` Trond Myklebust
2006-11-02 20:38             ` David Howells
2006-11-02 20:38               ` David Howells
2006-11-02 21:24               ` Trond Myklebust
2006-11-03 10:27                 ` David Howells
2006-11-03 10:27                   ` David Howells
2006-11-03 13:41                   ` Trond Myklebust
2006-11-03 15:23                     ` David Howells
2006-11-03 15:23                       ` David Howells
2006-11-03 17:30                       ` Trond Myklebust
2006-11-14 19:22                         ` David Howells
2006-11-14 19:22                           ` David Howells
2006-11-15 14:05                           ` Trond Myklebust
2006-11-15 15:28                             ` David Howells
2006-11-15 15:28                               ` David Howells
2006-11-15 16:41                               ` Trond Myklebust
2006-11-15 18:17                                 ` David Howells
2006-11-15 18:17                                   ` David Howells
2006-11-03 15:33                     ` David Howells
2006-11-03 15:33                       ` David Howells
2006-11-02 20:33           ` Stephen Smalley
2006-11-02 20:33             ` Stephen Smalley
2006-11-02 21:05             ` David Howells
2006-11-02 21:05               ` David Howells

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=2340.1161903200@redhat.com \
    --to=dhowells@redhat.com \
    --cc=aviro@redhat.com \
    --cc=chrisw@sous-sol.org \
    --cc=jmorris@namei.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=sds@tycho.nsa.gov \
    --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.