From: Christian Brauner <brauner@kernel.org>
To: Paul Moore <paul@paul-moore.com>
Cc: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, Seth Forshee <sforshee@kernel.org>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>, Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.ibm.com>,
linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org,
linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 18/30] evm: simplify evm_xattr_acl_change()
Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2022 15:31:39 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20220928133139.ectxtqgitfjmioef@wittgenstein> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAHC9VhTx-Pkh0E3Awr=BR-Zh31gmoP3d1MKHf-UPVibfV3VxKQ@mail.gmail.com>
On Tue, Sep 27, 2022 at 06:56:44PM -0400, Paul Moore wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 26, 2022 at 11:24 AM Christian Brauner <brauner@kernel.org> wrote:
> >
> > The posix acl api provides a dedicated security and integrity hook for
> > setting posix acls. This means that
> >
> > evm_protect_xattr()
> > -> evm_xattr_change()
> > -> evm_xattr_acl_change()
> >
> > is now only hit during vfs_remove_acl() at which point we are guaranteed
> > that xattr_value and xattr_value_len are NULL and 0. In this case evm
> > always used to return 1. Simplify this function to do just that.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Christian Brauner (Microsoft) <brauner@kernel.org>
> > ---
> >
> > Notes:
> > /* v2 */
> > unchanged
> >
> > security/integrity/evm/evm_main.c | 62 +++++++------------------------
> > 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 48 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/security/integrity/evm/evm_main.c b/security/integrity/evm/evm_main.c
> > index 15aa5995fff4..1fbe1b8d0364 100644
> > --- a/security/integrity/evm/evm_main.c
> > +++ b/security/integrity/evm/evm_main.c
> > @@ -436,62 +436,29 @@ static enum integrity_status evm_verify_current_integrity(struct dentry *dentry)
> >
> > /*
> > * evm_xattr_acl_change - check if passed ACL changes the inode mode
> > - * @mnt_userns: user namespace of the idmapped mount
> > - * @dentry: pointer to the affected dentry
> > * @xattr_name: requested xattr
> > * @xattr_value: requested xattr value
> > * @xattr_value_len: requested xattr value length
> > *
> > - * Check if passed ACL changes the inode mode, which is protected by EVM.
> > + * This is only hit during xattr removal at which point we always return 1.
> > + * Splat a warning in case someone managed to pass data to this function. That
> > + * should never happen.
> > *
> > * Returns 1 if passed ACL causes inode mode change, 0 otherwise.
> > */
> > -static int evm_xattr_acl_change(struct user_namespace *mnt_userns,
> > - struct dentry *dentry, const char *xattr_name,
> > - const void *xattr_value, size_t xattr_value_len)
> > +static int evm_xattr_acl_change(const void *xattr_value, size_t xattr_value_len)
> > {
> > -#ifdef CONFIG_FS_POSIX_ACL
> > - umode_t mode;
> > - struct posix_acl *acl = NULL, *acl_res;
> > - struct inode *inode = d_backing_inode(dentry);
> > - int rc;
> > -
> > - /*
> > - * An earlier comment here mentioned that the idmappings for
> > - * ACL_{GROUP,USER} don't matter since EVM is only interested in the
> > - * mode stored as part of POSIX ACLs. Nonetheless, if it must translate
> > - * from the uapi POSIX ACL representation to the VFS internal POSIX ACL
> > - * representation it should do so correctly. There's no guarantee that
> > - * we won't change POSIX ACLs in a way that ACL_{GROUP,USER} matters
> > - * for the mode at some point and it's difficult to keep track of all
> > - * the LSM and integrity modules and what they do to POSIX ACLs.
> > - *
> > - * Frankly, EVM shouldn't try to interpret the uapi struct for POSIX
> > - * ACLs it received. It requires knowledge that only the VFS is
> > - * guaranteed to have.
> > - */
> > - acl = vfs_set_acl_prepare(mnt_userns, i_user_ns(inode),
> > - xattr_value, xattr_value_len);
> > - if (IS_ERR_OR_NULL(acl))
> > - return 1;
> > -
> > - acl_res = acl;
> > - /*
> > - * Passing mnt_userns is necessary to correctly determine the GID in
> > - * an idmapped mount, as the GID is used to clear the setgid bit in
> > - * the inode mode.
> > - */
> > - rc = posix_acl_update_mode(mnt_userns, inode, &mode, &acl_res);
> > -
> > - posix_acl_release(acl);
> > -
> > - if (rc)
> > - return 1;
> > + int rc = 0;
> >
> > - if (inode->i_mode != mode)
> > - return 1;
> > +#ifdef CONFIG_FS_POSIX_ACL
> > + WARN_ONCE(xattr_value != NULL,
> > + "Passing xattr value for POSIX ACLs not supported\n");
> > + WARN_ONCE(xattr_value_len != 0,
> > + "Passing non-zero length for POSIX ACLs not supported\n");
> > + rc = 1;
> > #endif
> > - return 0;
> > +
> > + return rc;
> > }
>
> This is another case where I'll leave the final say up to Mimi, but
> why not just get rid of evm_xattr_acl_change() entirely? Unless I'm
> missing something, it's only reason for existing now is to check that
> it is passed the proper (empty) parameters which seems pointless ...
> no?
Yeah, I think we can remove it. evm_inode_remove_acl() is just
evm_inode_set_acl(NULL, 0) so if we add evm_inode_remove_acl() as a
wrapper around it instead of simply abusing the existing
evm_inode_removexattr() we can delete all that code indeed as it won't
be reachable from generic xattr code anymore.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-09-28 13:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 55+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-09-26 14:07 [PATCH v2 00/30] acl: add vfs posix acl api Christian Brauner
2022-09-26 14:07 ` [PATCH v2 01/30] orangefs: rework posix acl handling when creating new filesystem objects Christian Brauner
2022-09-26 14:07 ` [PATCH v2 02/30] fs: pass dentry to set acl method Christian Brauner
2022-09-26 14:08 ` [PATCH v2 03/30] fs: rename current get " Christian Brauner
2022-09-26 14:08 ` [PATCH v2 04/30] fs: add new " Christian Brauner
2022-09-26 14:08 ` [PATCH v2 05/30] cifs: implement " Christian Brauner
2022-09-26 14:08 ` [PATCH v2 06/30] cifs: implement set " Christian Brauner
2022-09-26 14:08 ` [PATCH v2 07/30] 9p: implement get " Christian Brauner
2022-09-26 14:08 ` [PATCH v2 08/30] 9p: implement set " Christian Brauner
2022-09-26 14:08 ` [PATCH v2 09/30] acl: add vfs_set_acl() Christian Brauner
2022-09-26 14:08 ` [PATCH v2 10/30] security: add set acl hook Christian Brauner
2022-09-27 22:55 ` Paul Moore
2022-09-26 14:08 ` [PATCH v2 11/30] selinux: implement " Christian Brauner
2022-09-27 22:55 ` Paul Moore
2022-09-26 14:08 ` [PATCH v2 12/30] smack: " Christian Brauner
2022-09-27 22:56 ` Paul Moore
2022-09-27 23:15 ` Casey Schaufler
2022-09-26 14:08 ` [PATCH v2 13/30] evm: " Christian Brauner
2022-09-27 22:56 ` Paul Moore
2022-09-26 14:08 ` [PATCH v2 14/30] acl: use " Christian Brauner
2022-09-27 22:56 ` Paul Moore
2022-09-26 14:08 ` [PATCH v2 15/30] evm: add post " Christian Brauner
2022-09-27 22:56 ` Paul Moore
2022-09-26 14:08 ` [PATCH v2 16/30] acl: add vfs_get_acl() Christian Brauner
2022-09-27 22:55 ` Paul Moore
2022-09-28 7:40 ` Christian Brauner
2022-09-28 14:58 ` Paul Moore
2022-09-28 15:12 ` Christian Brauner
2022-09-28 15:27 ` Paul Moore
2022-09-26 14:08 ` [PATCH v2 17/30] acl: add vfs_remove_acl() Christian Brauner
2022-09-27 22:55 ` Paul Moore
2022-09-28 7:41 ` Christian Brauner
2022-09-26 14:08 ` [PATCH v2 18/30] evm: simplify evm_xattr_acl_change() Christian Brauner
2022-09-27 22:56 ` Paul Moore
2022-09-28 13:31 ` Christian Brauner [this message]
2022-09-26 14:08 ` [PATCH v2 19/30] ksmbd: use vfs_remove_acl() Christian Brauner
2022-09-26 14:08 ` [PATCH v2 20/30] ecryptfs: implement get acl method Christian Brauner
2022-09-26 14:08 ` [PATCH v2 21/30] ecryptfs: implement set " Christian Brauner
2022-09-26 14:08 ` [PATCH v2 22/30] ovl: implement get " Christian Brauner
2022-09-26 14:08 ` [PATCH v2 23/30] ovl: implement set " Christian Brauner
2022-09-26 14:08 ` [PATCH v2 24/30] ovl: use posix acl api Christian Brauner
2022-09-26 14:08 ` [PATCH v2 25/30] xattr: " Christian Brauner
2022-09-26 14:08 ` [PATCH v2 26/30] ecryptfs: use stub posix acl handlers Christian Brauner
2022-09-26 14:08 ` [PATCH v2 27/30] ovl: " Christian Brauner
2022-09-26 14:08 ` [PATCH v2 28/30] cifs: " Christian Brauner
2022-09-26 14:08 ` [PATCH v2 29/30] 9p: " Christian Brauner
2022-09-26 14:08 ` [PATCH v2 30/30] acl: remove a slew of now unused helpers Christian Brauner
2022-09-27 0:22 ` [PATCH v2 00/30] acl: add vfs posix acl api Casey Schaufler
2022-09-27 7:41 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-09-27 7:59 ` Christian Brauner
2022-09-27 14:11 ` Casey Schaufler
2022-09-27 15:16 ` Seth Forshee
2022-09-27 15:55 ` Casey Schaufler
2022-09-27 23:24 ` Paul Moore
2022-09-27 23:37 ` Casey Schaufler
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=20220928133139.ectxtqgitfjmioef@wittgenstein \
--to=brauner@kernel.org \
--cc=hch@lst.de \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=paul@paul-moore.com \
--cc=sforshee@kernel.org \
--cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
--cc=zohar@linux.ibm.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 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).