All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Paul Moore <paul.moore@hp.com>
To: vyekkirala@TrustedCS.com
Cc: "'James Morris'" <jmorris@namei.org>,
	Venkat Yekkirala <vyekkirala@tcsfw4.tcs-sec.com>,
	jbrindle@tresys.com, selinux@tycho.nsa.gov,
	Stephen Smalley <sds@tycho.nsa.gov>,
	gcwilson@us.ibm.com
Subject: Re: SELinux Networking Enhancements
Date: Wed, 01 Nov 2006 16:29:32 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <454911BC.9060708@hp.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <000e01c6fdf8$9ee6a430$cc0a010a@tcssec.com>


>>Well, it's matching labels on xfrms.  The filtering concept
>>is implicit in
>>it being an iptables match, and secid/sec is vague.
> 
> Actually I meant for the filtering to be explicit as in the following
> example:
> 
> Label filter points:
> 
> iptables -t filter -A INPUT -s client1 -j SECFILTER --selctx
> "system_u:object_r:client1_t:s4-s5"
> iptables -t filter -A OUTPUT -s client1 -j SECFILTER --selctx
> "system_u:object_r:client1_t:s4-s5"
> 
> Policy rules:
> 
> allow mozilla_t client1_t:secfilter { flow_in };
> allow apache_t client1_t:secfilter { flow_out };

Am I correct is stating that this is basically your "secpoint" idea with the
following changes:

1. The "secpoint" is no longer the skb->secmark field but rather the context
specified in the iptables command (using the 'selctx' option) above.
2. There is no longer a need to override/overload/etc. the skb->secmark context.

Yes?

> If you are also using secmark:
> 
> Labeling:
> <Normal secmark rules to mark http_server_packet_t and dns_client_packet_t>
> 
> Additional Policy rules:
> allow http_server_packet_t client1_t:secfilter { flow_in flow_out };
> allow dns_client_packet_t dns_server_t:secfilter { flow_in flow_out };

In order to simplify things a bit I wonder if it would be best to hash out the
"secfilter" concept using external labels at first, and then add internal labels
later.  I understand the desire to have the same/similar access controls for
both external and internal labels but I think a smaller, more iterative approach
might be a little easier to get understood and accepted.  Plus, as you stated
earlier, using 'secfilter' with 'secmark' really only adds to your assurance
level; equivalent access controls already exist for internal labeling.

> You could just as easily define rules for forwarded traffic.

Can you help me understand the forwarding case as you envision it (using
external labeling)?  The things I am interested in are:

1. What would the policy look like?
2. Where would the access control points be in the code?
3. Does this require segmenting the skb->secmark field?
4. What would the iptables command(s) look like?

-- 
paul moore
linux security @ 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.

  reply	other threads:[~2006-11-01 21:29 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 63+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2006-10-20 15:10 SELinux Networking Enhancements Venkat Yekkirala
2006-10-20 23:24 ` James Morris
2006-10-23 16:32   ` Venkat Yekkirala
2006-10-23 21:17     ` James Morris
2006-10-24 14:33       ` Venkat Yekkirala
2006-10-30 18:27         ` James Morris
2006-10-30 18:34           ` Joshua Brindle
2006-10-30 18:40             ` James Morris
2006-10-30 18:43               ` Joshua Brindle
2006-10-30 18:49                 ` James Morris
2006-10-31 20:54           ` Venkat Yekkirala
2006-11-01  3:46             ` James Morris
2006-11-01 15:04               ` Paul Moore
2006-11-01 16:00                 ` James Morris
2006-11-01 16:09                   ` Paul Moore
2006-11-01 17:26                     ` James Morris
2006-11-01 17:39                       ` Paul Moore
2006-11-01 20:59                   ` Venkat Yekkirala
2006-11-01 21:29                     ` Paul Moore [this message]
2006-11-02 15:15                       ` Venkat Yekkirala
2006-11-02 15:26                         ` Paul Moore
2006-11-02 15:47                           ` Venkat Yekkirala
2006-11-02 16:43                         ` James Morris
2006-11-02 16:45                           ` James Morris
2006-11-02 17:10                             ` Venkat Yekkirala
2006-11-02 17:22                               ` James Morris
2006-11-02 17:31                                 ` Venkat Yekkirala
2006-11-02 16:49                         ` Joshua Brindle
2006-11-02 17:01                           ` Venkat Yekkirala
2006-11-02 17:19                             ` Joshua Brindle
2006-11-02 17:38                               ` Venkat Yekkirala
2006-11-02 17:51                                 ` Paul Moore
2006-11-02 17:53                                 ` Joshua Brindle
2006-11-03 15:12                                   ` Venkat Yekkirala
2006-11-03 18:44                                     ` Joshua Brindle
2006-11-01 14:02           ` Christopher J. PeBenito
2006-11-01 15:58             ` Venkat Yekkirala
2006-11-01 17:54               ` Joshua Brindle
2006-11-01 17:59                 ` Paul Moore
2006-11-01 19:25                   ` Venkat Yekkirala
2006-11-01 19:46                     ` Joshua Brindle
2006-11-01 17:55               ` Christopher J. PeBenito
2006-11-01 18:30                 ` Paul Moore
2006-11-01 19:57                 ` James Morris
2006-11-01 19:59                   ` Joshua Brindle
2006-11-02 16:20                 ` Venkat Yekkirala
2006-11-02 18:33                   ` Christopher J. PeBenito
2006-11-03 14:49                     ` Venkat Yekkirala
     [not found] <36282A1733C57546BE392885C06185920166D6EC@chaos.tcs.tcs-sec.com>
2006-11-02 16:22 ` Venkat Yekkirala
2006-11-02 16:31   ` Joshua Brindle
2006-11-02 16:54     ` Venkat Yekkirala
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2006-10-16 14:55 Venkat Yekkirala
2006-10-16  3:14 Venkat Yekkirala
2006-10-16 12:40 ` Joshua Brindle
2006-10-16 14:31   ` Venkat Yekkirala
2006-10-18 13:23     ` Joshua Brindle
2006-10-18 14:08       ` Joe Nall
2006-10-18 15:10       ` Venkat Yekkirala
2006-10-18 16:09         ` Joshua Brindle
2006-10-19 15:06           ` Venkat Yekkirala
2006-10-19 16:04             ` Joshua Brindle
2006-10-19 16:54               ` Venkat Yekkirala
2006-10-19 21:27             ` James Morris

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=454911BC.9060708@hp.com \
    --to=paul.moore@hp.com \
    --cc=gcwilson@us.ibm.com \
    --cc=jbrindle@tresys.com \
    --cc=jmorris@namei.org \
    --cc=sds@tycho.nsa.gov \
    --cc=selinux@tycho.nsa.gov \
    --cc=vyekkirala@TrustedCS.com \
    --cc=vyekkirala@tcsfw4.tcs-sec.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.