linux-security-module.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: chenbofeng.kernel@gmail.com (Chenbo Feng)
To: linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH net-next v6 5/5] selinux: bpf: Add addtional check for bpf object file receive
Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2017 12:11:35 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20171016191135.8046-6-chenbofeng.kernel@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20171016191135.8046-1-chenbofeng.kernel@gmail.com>

From: Chenbo Feng <fengc@google.com>

Introduce a bpf object related check when sending and receiving files
through unix domain socket as well as binder. It checks if the receiving
process have privilege to read/write the bpf map or use the bpf program.
This check is necessary because the bpf maps and programs are using a
anonymous inode as their shared inode so the normal way of checking the
files and sockets when passing between processes cannot work properly on
eBPF object. This check only works when the BPF_SYSCALL is configured.

Signed-off-by: Chenbo Feng <fengc@google.com>
Acked-by: Stephen Smalley <sds@tycho.nsa.gov>
---
 include/linux/bpf.h      |  3 +++
 kernel/bpf/syscall.c     |  4 ++--
 security/selinux/hooks.c | 49 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 3 files changed, 54 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/include/linux/bpf.h b/include/linux/bpf.h
index 1479442d5293..1ac507dc19a8 100644
--- a/include/linux/bpf.h
+++ b/include/linux/bpf.h
@@ -285,6 +285,9 @@ int bpf_prog_array_copy_to_user(struct bpf_prog_array __rcu *progs,
 #ifdef CONFIG_BPF_SYSCALL
 DECLARE_PER_CPU(int, bpf_prog_active);
 
+extern const struct file_operations bpf_map_fops;
+extern const struct file_operations bpf_prog_fops;
+
 #define BPF_PROG_TYPE(_id, _ops) \
 	extern const struct bpf_verifier_ops _ops;
 #define BPF_MAP_TYPE(_id, _ops) \
diff --git a/kernel/bpf/syscall.c b/kernel/bpf/syscall.c
index d3e152e282d8..8bdb98aa7f34 100644
--- a/kernel/bpf/syscall.c
+++ b/kernel/bpf/syscall.c
@@ -313,7 +313,7 @@ static ssize_t bpf_dummy_write(struct file *filp, const char __user *buf,
 	return -EINVAL;
 }
 
-static const struct file_operations bpf_map_fops = {
+const struct file_operations bpf_map_fops = {
 #ifdef CONFIG_PROC_FS
 	.show_fdinfo	= bpf_map_show_fdinfo,
 #endif
@@ -967,7 +967,7 @@ static void bpf_prog_show_fdinfo(struct seq_file *m, struct file *filp)
 }
 #endif
 
-static const struct file_operations bpf_prog_fops = {
+const struct file_operations bpf_prog_fops = {
 #ifdef CONFIG_PROC_FS
 	.show_fdinfo	= bpf_prog_show_fdinfo,
 #endif
diff --git a/security/selinux/hooks.c b/security/selinux/hooks.c
index 12cf7de8cbed..2e3a627fc0b1 100644
--- a/security/selinux/hooks.c
+++ b/security/selinux/hooks.c
@@ -1815,6 +1815,10 @@ static inline int file_path_has_perm(const struct cred *cred,
 	return inode_has_perm(cred, file_inode(file), av, &ad);
 }
 
+#ifdef CONFIG_BPF_SYSCALL
+static int bpf_fd_pass(struct file *file, u32 sid);
+#endif
+
 /* Check whether a task can use an open file descriptor to
    access an inode in a given way.  Check access to the
    descriptor itself, and then use dentry_has_perm to
@@ -1845,6 +1849,12 @@ static int file_has_perm(const struct cred *cred,
 			goto out;
 	}
 
+#ifdef CONFIG_BPF_SYSCALL
+	rc = bpf_fd_pass(file, cred_sid(cred));
+	if (rc)
+		return rc;
+#endif
+
 	/* av is zero if only checking access to the descriptor. */
 	rc = 0;
 	if (av)
@@ -2165,6 +2175,12 @@ static int selinux_binder_transfer_file(struct task_struct *from,
 			return rc;
 	}
 
+#ifdef CONFIG_BPF_SYSCALL
+	rc = bpf_fd_pass(file, sid);
+	if (rc)
+		return rc;
+#endif
+
 	if (unlikely(IS_PRIVATE(d_backing_inode(dentry))))
 		return 0;
 
@@ -6288,6 +6304,39 @@ static u32 bpf_map_fmode_to_av(fmode_t fmode)
 	return av;
 }
 
+/* This function will check the file pass through unix socket or binder to see
+ * if it is a bpf related object. And apply correspinding checks on the bpf
+ * object based on the type. The bpf maps and programs, not like other files and
+ * socket, are using a shared anonymous inode inside the kernel as their inode.
+ * So checking that inode cannot identify if the process have privilege to
+ * access the bpf object and that's why we have to add this additional check in
+ * selinux_file_receive and selinux_binder_transfer_files.
+ */
+static int bpf_fd_pass(struct file *file, u32 sid)
+{
+	struct bpf_security_struct *bpfsec;
+	struct bpf_prog *prog;
+	struct bpf_map *map;
+	int ret;
+
+	if (file->f_op == &bpf_map_fops) {
+		map = file->private_data;
+		bpfsec = map->security;
+		ret = avc_has_perm(sid, bpfsec->sid, SECCLASS_BPF,
+				   bpf_map_fmode_to_av(file->f_mode), NULL);
+		if (ret)
+			return ret;
+	} else if (file->f_op == &bpf_prog_fops) {
+		prog = file->private_data;
+		bpfsec = prog->aux->security;
+		ret = avc_has_perm(sid, bpfsec->sid, SECCLASS_BPF,
+				   BPF__PROG_RUN, NULL);
+		if (ret)
+			return ret;
+	}
+	return 0;
+}
+
 static int selinux_bpf_map(struct bpf_map *map, fmode_t fmode)
 {
 	u32 sid = current_sid();
-- 
2.15.0.rc0.271.g36b669edcc-goog

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-security-module" in
the body of a message to majordomo at vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

  parent reply	other threads:[~2017-10-16 19:11 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-10-16 19:11 [PATCH net-next v6 0/5] bpf: security: New file mode and LSM hooks for eBPF object permission control Chenbo Feng
2017-10-16 19:11 ` [PATCH net-next v6 1/5] bpf: Add file mode configuration into bpf maps Chenbo Feng
2017-10-16 22:59   ` Daniel Borkmann
2017-10-18 13:52   ` Daniel Borkmann
2017-10-16 19:11 ` [PATCH net-next v6 2/5] bpf: Add tests for eBPF file mode Chenbo Feng
2017-10-16 23:00   ` Daniel Borkmann
2017-10-16 19:11 ` [PATCH net-next v6 3/5] security: bpf: Add LSM hooks for bpf object related syscall Chenbo Feng
2017-10-16 19:11 ` [PATCH net-next v6 4/5] selinux: bpf: Add selinux check for eBPF syscall operations Chenbo Feng
2017-10-16 19:11 ` Chenbo Feng [this message]
2017-10-18 12:47 ` [PATCH net-next v6 0/5] bpf: security: New file mode and LSM hooks for eBPF object permission control David Miller
2017-10-18 13:11   ` David Miller
2017-10-19  1:49   ` James Morris
2017-10-19  9:48     ` Daniel Borkmann
2017-10-19 11:00     ` David Miller

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=20171016191135.8046-6-chenbofeng.kernel@gmail.com \
    --to=chenbofeng.kernel@gmail.com \
    --cc=linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org \
    /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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).