All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: etienne <etienne.basset@numericable.fr>
To: LSM <linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Cc: Casey Schaufler <casey@schaufler-ca.com>, Paul Moore <paul.moore@hp.com>
Subject: [patch][smack][2.6.29-rc] fixes for unlabeled host support
Date: Wed, 04 Mar 2009 07:33:51 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <49AE20CF.1030601@numericable.fr> (raw)

Hello,

The following patch (against 2.6.29rc5) fixes a few issues in the smack/netlabel 
"unlabeled host support" functionnality that was added in 2.6.29rc.
It should go in before -final.


1) smack_host_label disregard a "0.0.0.0/0 @" rule (or other label), preventing 'tagged' tasks to access Internet (many systems drop packets with IP options)
2) netmasks were not handled correctly, they were stored in a way _not equivalent_  to conversion to be32 (it was equivalent for /0, /8, /16, /24, /32 masks but not other masks)
3) smack_netlbladdr prefixes (IP/mask) were not consistent (mask&IP was not done), so there could have been different list entries for the same IP prefix; if those entries had different labels, well ... 
4) they were not sorted 

1) 2) 3) are bugs, 4) is a more cosmetic issue.
The patch :
-creates a new helper smk_netlbladdr_insert to insert a smk_netlbladdr, sorted by netmask length
-use the new sorted nature of  smack_netlbladdrs list to simplify smack_host_label : 
 the first match _will_ be the more specific
-corrects endianness issues in smk_write_netlbladdr &  netlbladdr_seq_show


regards,
Etienne Basset

Signed-off-by: <etienne.basset@numericable.fr>
---


security/smack/smack_lsm.c |   43 +++++------------------------
 security/smack/smackfs.c   |   64 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------
 2 files changed, 57 insertions(+), 50 deletions(-)

diff --git a/security/smack/smack_lsm.c b/security/smack/smack_lsm.c
index 0278bc0..e7ded13 100644
--- a/security/smack/smack_lsm.c
+++ b/security/smack/smack_lsm.c
@@ -1498,58 +1498,31 @@ static int smack_socket_post_create(struct socket *sock, int family,
  * looks for host based access restrictions
  *
  * This version will only be appropriate for really small
- * sets of single label hosts. Because of the masking
- * it cannot shortcut out on the first match. There are
- * numerious ways to address the problem, but none of them
- * have been applied here.
+ * sets of single label hosts.
  *
  * Returns the label of the far end or NULL if it's not special.
  */
 static char *smack_host_label(struct sockaddr_in *sip)
 {
 	struct smk_netlbladdr *snp;
-	char *bestlabel = NULL;
 	struct in_addr *siap = &sip->sin_addr;
-	struct in_addr *liap;
-	struct in_addr *miap;
-	struct in_addr bestmask;
 
 	if (siap->s_addr == 0)
 		return NULL;
 
-	bestmask.s_addr = 0;
-
 	for (snp = smack_netlbladdrs; snp != NULL; snp = snp->smk_next) {
-		liap = &snp->smk_host.sin_addr;
-		miap = &snp->smk_mask;
-		/*
-		 * If the addresses match after applying the list entry mask
-		 * the entry matches the address. If it doesn't move along to
-		 * the next entry.
-		 */
-		if ((liap->s_addr & miap->s_addr) !=
-		    (siap->s_addr & miap->s_addr))
-			continue;
 		/*
-		 * If the list entry mask identifies a single address
-		 * it can't get any more specific.
+		 * we break after finding the first match because
+		 * the list is sorted from longest to shortest mask
+		 * so we have found the most specific match
 		 */
-		if (miap->s_addr == 0xffffffff)
+		if ((&snp->smk_host.sin_addr)->s_addr  ==
+			(siap->s_addr & (&snp->smk_mask)->s_addr)) {
 			return snp->smk_label;
-		/*
-		 * If the list entry mask is less specific than the best
-		 * already found this entry is uninteresting.
-		 */
-		if ((miap->s_addr | bestmask.s_addr) == bestmask.s_addr)
-			continue;
-		/*
-		 * This is better than any entry found so far.
-		 */
-		bestmask.s_addr = miap->s_addr;
-		bestlabel = snp->smk_label;
+		}
 	}
 
-	return bestlabel;
+	return NULL;
 }
 
 /**
diff --git a/security/smack/smackfs.c b/security/smack/smackfs.c
index 8e42800..51f0efc 100644
--- a/security/smack/smackfs.c
+++ b/security/smack/smackfs.c
@@ -650,10 +650,6 @@ static void *netlbladdr_seq_next(struct seq_file *s, void *v, loff_t *pos)
 
 	return skp;
 }
-/*
-#define BEMASK	0x80000000
-*/
-#define BEMASK	0x00000001
 #define BEBITS	(sizeof(__be32) * 8)
 
 /*
@@ -663,12 +659,10 @@ static int netlbladdr_seq_show(struct seq_file *s, void *v)
 {
 	struct smk_netlbladdr *skp = (struct smk_netlbladdr *) v;
 	unsigned char *hp = (char *) &skp->smk_host.sin_addr.s_addr;
-	__be32 bebits;
-	int maskn = 0;
+	int maskn;
+	u32 temp_mask = be32_to_cpu(skp->smk_mask.s_addr);
 
-	for (bebits = BEMASK; bebits != 0; maskn++, bebits <<= 1)
-		if ((skp->smk_mask.s_addr & bebits) == 0)
-			break;
+	for (maskn = 0; temp_mask; temp_mask <<= 1, maskn++);
 
 	seq_printf(s, "%u.%u.%u.%u/%d %s\n",
 		hp[0], hp[1], hp[2], hp[3], maskn, skp->smk_label);
@@ -702,6 +696,42 @@ static int smk_open_netlbladdr(struct inode *inode, struct file *file)
 }
 
 /**
+ * smk_netlbladdr_insert
+ * @new : netlabel to insert
+ *
+ * This helper insert netlabel in the smack_netlbladdrs list
+ * sorted by netmask length (longest to smallest)
+ */
+static void smk_netlbladdr_insert(struct smk_netlbladdr *new)
+{
+	struct smk_netlbladdr *m;
+
+	if (smack_netlbladdrs == NULL) {
+		smack_netlbladdrs = new;
+		return;
+	}
+
+	/* the comparison '>' is a bit hacky, but works */
+	if (new->smk_mask.s_addr > smack_netlbladdrs->smk_mask.s_addr) {
+		new->smk_next = smack_netlbladdrs;
+		smack_netlbladdrs = new;
+		return;
+	}
+	for (m = smack_netlbladdrs; m != NULL; m = m->smk_next) {
+		if (m->smk_next == NULL) {
+			m->smk_next = new;
+			return;
+		}
+		if (new->smk_mask.s_addr > m->smk_next->smk_mask.s_addr) {
+			new->smk_next = m->smk_next;
+			m->smk_next = new;
+			return;
+		}
+	}
+}
+
+
+/**
  * smk_write_netlbladdr - write() for /smack/netlabel
  * @filp: file pointer, not actually used
  * @buf: where to get the data from
@@ -724,8 +754,9 @@ static ssize_t smk_write_netlbladdr(struct file *file, const char __user *buf,
 	struct netlbl_audit audit_info;
 	struct in_addr mask;
 	unsigned int m;
-	__be32 bebits = BEMASK;
+	u32 mask_bits = (1<<31);
 	__be32 nsa;
+	u32 temp_mask;
 
 	/*
 	 * Must have privilege.
@@ -761,10 +792,13 @@ static ssize_t smk_write_netlbladdr(struct file *file, const char __user *buf,
 	if (sp == NULL)
 		return -EINVAL;
 
-	for (mask.s_addr = 0; m > 0; m--) {
-		mask.s_addr |= bebits;
-		bebits <<= 1;
+	for (temp_mask = 0; m > 0; m--) {
+		temp_mask |= mask_bits;
+		mask_bits >>= 1;
 	}
+	mask.s_addr = cpu_to_be32(temp_mask);
+
+	newname.sin_addr.s_addr &= mask.s_addr;
 	/*
 	 * Only allow one writer at a time. Writes should be
 	 * quite rare and small in any case.
@@ -772,6 +806,7 @@ static ssize_t smk_write_netlbladdr(struct file *file, const char __user *buf,
 	mutex_lock(&smk_netlbladdr_lock);
 
 	nsa = newname.sin_addr.s_addr;
+	/* try to find if the prefix is already in the list */
 	for (skp = smack_netlbladdrs; skp != NULL; skp = skp->smk_next)
 		if (skp->smk_host.sin_addr.s_addr == nsa &&
 		    skp->smk_mask.s_addr == mask.s_addr)
@@ -787,9 +822,8 @@ static ssize_t smk_write_netlbladdr(struct file *file, const char __user *buf,
 			rc = 0;
 			skp->smk_host.sin_addr.s_addr = newname.sin_addr.s_addr;
 			skp->smk_mask.s_addr = mask.s_addr;
-			skp->smk_next = smack_netlbladdrs;
 			skp->smk_label = sp;
-			smack_netlbladdrs = skp;
+			smk_netlbladdr_insert(skp);
 		}
 	} else {
 		rc = netlbl_cfg_unlbl_static_del(&init_net, NULL,


             reply	other threads:[~2009-03-04  6:34 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2009-03-04  6:33 etienne [this message]
2009-03-04 16:31 ` [patch][smack][2.6.29-rc] fixes for unlabeled host support Casey Schaufler
2009-03-04 16:47 ` Paul Moore

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=49AE20CF.1030601@numericable.fr \
    --to=etienne.basset@numericable.fr \
    --cc=casey@schaufler-ca.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=paul.moore@hp.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.