From: Joshua Brindle <jbrindle@tresys.com>
To: Venkat Yekkirala <vyekkirala@TrustedCS.com>
Cc: "Christopher J. PeBenito" <cpebenito@tresys.com>,
selinux@tycho.nsa.gov, redhat-lspp@redhat.com
Subject: Re: Networking policy patch
Date: Fri, 06 Oct 2006 11:13:47 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <452672AB.4020309@tresys.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <36282A1733C57546BE392885C0618592015CFBBB@chaos.tcs.tcs-sec.com>
Venkat Yekkirala wrote:
>>
>>> +mlsconstrain association { recvfrom }
>>> + ((( l1 dom l2 ) and ( l1 domby h2 )) or
>>> + (( t1 == mlsnetreadtoclr ) and ( h1 dom l2 )) or
>>> + ( t1 == mlsnetread ) or
>>> + ( t2 == unlabeled_t ));
>>>
>> Don't we want network_t instead of unlabeled_t?
>>
>
> Actually, the above only applies to the compat_net case
> and there unlabeled_t is just fine.
>
>
why isn't compat_net using the same default sid for associations?
> So, there are different MLS constraints (and policy) for
> the compat_net case as opposed to the new secmark controls.
>
>
there shouldn't be, compat_net and secmark use different object classes
(except association) and the behaviors should not conflict
> I guess you are planning to have one policy for compat_net
> and another for secmark?
>
>
I'll let Chris comment here but I don't think that is ideal.
>>> +mlsconstrain association { sendto }
>>> + (( l1 eq l2 ) and ( h1 eq h2 ));
>>>
>> or (t2 == network_t) ?
>>
>
> No. Not in the secmark case.
>
If there are no ipsec associations at all it will default to
network_t:SystemHigh-SystemLow so this would only allow domains that are
SystemHigh-SystemLow to send plaintext? Not sure this is what we want
> <snip>
>>> +constrain association sendto
>>> + ( u1 == u2 and r1 == r2 and t1 == t2 );
>>>
>> I talked with Joshua and we determined that there is a case were we
>> don't want this constraint (looking forward to policy management
>> server's use of labeled networking), so I've dropped it.
>>
>
> The above constraint is necessary for the kernel portions of SELinux
> to work properly. In fact I was going to originally implement it in the
> kernel and when Darrel made me aware of the constraint framework and the
> benefits with avc caching, etc., I decided to use it.
>
>
This completely disallows the use of setsockcreatecon() with labeled
networking, not good.
--
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:[~2006-10-06 15:13 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-10-06 13:27 Networking policy patch Venkat Yekkirala
2006-10-06 15:13 ` Joshua Brindle [this message]
2006-10-06 15:42 ` Christopher J. PeBenito
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2006-10-04 2:54 Venkat Yekkirala
2006-10-05 18:18 ` Christopher J. PeBenito
2006-10-05 18:40 ` Joshua Brindle
2006-10-06 10:46 ` Joshua Brindle
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=452672AB.4020309@tresys.com \
--to=jbrindle@tresys.com \
--cc=cpebenito@tresys.com \
--cc=redhat-lspp@redhat.com \
--cc=selinux@tycho.nsa.gov \
--cc=vyekkirala@TrustedCS.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.