From: John Johansen <john.johansen@canonical.com>
To: Casey Schaufler <casey@schaufler-ca.com>,
casey.schaufler@intel.com, jmorris@namei.org,
linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org, selinux@vger.kernel.org
Cc: linux-audit@redhat.com, keescook@chromium.org,
penguin-kernel@i-love.sakura.ne.jp, paul@paul-moore.com,
stephen.smalley.work@gmail.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v35 06/29] LSM: Use lsmblob in security_audit_rule_match
Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2022 09:49:39 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <0673dfee-4968-9b72-dd4e-b5fdffac0a7d@canonical.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220418145945.38797-7-casey@schaufler-ca.com>
On 4/18/22 07:59, Casey Schaufler wrote:
> Change the secid parameter of security_audit_rule_match
> to a lsmblob structure pointer. Pass the entry from the
> lsmblob structure for the approprite slot to the LSM hook.
>
> Change the users of security_audit_rule_match to use the
> lsmblob instead of a u32. The scaffolding function lsmblob_init()
> fills the blob with the value of the old secid, ensuring that
> it is available to the appropriate module hook. The sources of
> the secid, security_task_getsecid() and security_inode_getsecid(),
> will be converted to use the blob structure later in the series.
> At the point the use of lsmblob_init() is dropped.
>
> Signed-off-by: Casey Schaufler <casey@schaufler-ca.com>
> Acked-by: Paul Moore <paul@paul-moore.com>
Reviewed-by: John Johansen <john.johansen@canonical.com>
> Cc: linux-audit@redhat.com
> ---
> include/linux/security.h | 5 +++--
> kernel/auditfilter.c | 6 ++++--
> kernel/auditsc.c | 16 +++++++++++-----
> security/security.c | 5 +++--
> 4 files changed, 21 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/include/linux/security.h b/include/linux/security.h
> index 3666eddad59a..ee5d14dac65f 100644
> --- a/include/linux/security.h
> +++ b/include/linux/security.h
> @@ -1955,7 +1955,7 @@ static inline int security_key_getsecurity(struct key *key, char **_buffer)
> int security_audit_rule_init(u32 field, u32 op, char *rulestr,
> struct audit_lsm_rules *lsmrules);
> int security_audit_rule_known(struct audit_krule *krule);
> -int security_audit_rule_match(u32 secid, u32 field, u32 op,
> +int security_audit_rule_match(struct lsmblob *blob, u32 field, u32 op,
> struct audit_lsm_rules *lsmrules);
> void security_audit_rule_free(struct audit_lsm_rules *lsmrules);
>
> @@ -1972,7 +1972,8 @@ static inline int security_audit_rule_known(struct audit_krule *krule)
> return 0;
> }
>
> -static inline int security_audit_rule_match(u32 secid, u32 field, u32 op,
> +static inline int security_audit_rule_match(struct lsmblob *blob,
> + u32 field, u32 op,
> struct audit_lsm_rules *lsmrules)
> {
> return 0;
> diff --git a/kernel/auditfilter.c b/kernel/auditfilter.c
> index de75bd6ad866..15cd4fe35e9c 100644
> --- a/kernel/auditfilter.c
> +++ b/kernel/auditfilter.c
> @@ -1337,6 +1337,7 @@ int audit_filter(int msgtype, unsigned int listtype)
>
> for (i = 0; i < e->rule.field_count; i++) {
> struct audit_field *f = &e->rule.fields[i];
> + struct lsmblob blob;
> pid_t pid;
> u32 sid;
>
> @@ -1369,8 +1370,9 @@ int audit_filter(int msgtype, unsigned int listtype)
> case AUDIT_SUBJ_CLR:
> if (f->lsm_str) {
> security_current_getsecid_subj(&sid);
> - result = security_audit_rule_match(sid,
> - f->type, f->op,
> + lsmblob_init(&blob, sid);
> + result = security_audit_rule_match(
> + &blob, f->type, f->op,
> &f->lsm_rules);
> }
> break;
> diff --git a/kernel/auditsc.c b/kernel/auditsc.c
> index d272b5cf18a8..a9d5bfa37cb3 100644
> --- a/kernel/auditsc.c
> +++ b/kernel/auditsc.c
> @@ -468,6 +468,7 @@ static int audit_filter_rules(struct task_struct *tsk,
> const struct cred *cred;
> int i, need_sid = 1;
> u32 sid;
> + struct lsmblob blob;
> unsigned int sessionid;
>
> if (ctx && rule->prio <= ctx->prio)
> @@ -678,8 +679,10 @@ static int audit_filter_rules(struct task_struct *tsk,
> security_current_getsecid_subj(&sid);
> need_sid = 0;
> }
> - result = security_audit_rule_match(sid, f->type,
> - f->op, &f->lsm_rules);
> + lsmblob_init(&blob, sid);
> + result = security_audit_rule_match(&blob,
> + f->type, f->op,
> + &f->lsm_rules);
> }
> break;
> case AUDIT_OBJ_USER:
> @@ -692,15 +695,17 @@ static int audit_filter_rules(struct task_struct *tsk,
> if (f->lsm_str) {
> /* Find files that match */
> if (name) {
> + lsmblob_init(&blob, name->osid);
> result = security_audit_rule_match(
> - name->osid,
> + &blob,
> f->type,
> f->op,
> &f->lsm_rules);
> } else if (ctx) {
> list_for_each_entry(n, &ctx->names_list, list) {
> + lsmblob_init(&blob, n->osid);
> if (security_audit_rule_match(
> - n->osid, f->type, f->op,
> + &blob, f->type, f->op,
> &f->lsm_rules)) {
> ++result;
> break;
> @@ -710,7 +715,8 @@ static int audit_filter_rules(struct task_struct *tsk,
> /* Find ipc objects that match */
> if (!ctx || ctx->type != AUDIT_IPC)
> break;
> - if (security_audit_rule_match(ctx->ipc.osid,
> + lsmblob_init(&blob, ctx->ipc.osid);
> + if (security_audit_rule_match(&blob,
> f->type, f->op,
> &f->lsm_rules))
> ++result;
> diff --git a/security/security.c b/security/security.c
> index 9e0139b0d346..ced1c76a380f 100644
> --- a/security/security.c
> +++ b/security/security.c
> @@ -2703,7 +2703,7 @@ void security_audit_rule_free(struct audit_lsm_rules *lsmrules)
> }
> }
>
> -int security_audit_rule_match(u32 secid, u32 field, u32 op,
> +int security_audit_rule_match(struct lsmblob *blob, u32 field, u32 op,
> struct audit_lsm_rules *lsmrules)
> {
> struct security_hook_list *hp;
> @@ -2714,7 +2714,8 @@ int security_audit_rule_match(u32 secid, u32 field, u32 op,
> continue;
> if (lsmrules->rule[hp->lsmid->slot] == NULL)
> continue;
> - rc = hp->hook.audit_rule_match(secid, field, op,
> + rc = hp->hook.audit_rule_match(blob->secid[hp->lsmid->slot],
> + field, op,
> &lsmrules->rule[hp->lsmid->slot]);
> if (rc)
> return rc;
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-04-21 16:50 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 64+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <20220418145945.38797-1-casey.ref@schaufler-ca.com>
2022-04-18 14:59 ` [PATCH v35 00/29] LSM: Module stacking for AppArmor Casey Schaufler
2022-04-18 14:59 ` [PATCH v35 01/29] integrity: disassociate ima_filter_rule from security_audit_rule Casey Schaufler
2022-04-21 16:51 ` John Johansen
2022-04-18 14:59 ` [PATCH v35 02/29] LSM: Infrastructure management of the sock security Casey Schaufler
2022-04-18 14:59 ` [PATCH v35 03/29] LSM: Add the lsmblob data structure Casey Schaufler
2022-04-26 23:15 ` John Johansen
2022-04-18 14:59 ` [PATCH v35 04/29] LSM: provide lsm name and id slot mappings Casey Schaufler
2022-04-21 16:50 ` John Johansen
2022-04-18 14:59 ` [PATCH v35 05/29] IMA: avoid label collisions with stacked LSMs Casey Schaufler
2022-04-21 16:50 ` John Johansen
2022-04-18 14:59 ` [PATCH v35 06/29] LSM: Use lsmblob in security_audit_rule_match Casey Schaufler
2022-04-21 16:49 ` John Johansen [this message]
2022-04-18 14:59 ` [PATCH v35 07/29] LSM: Use lsmblob in security_kernel_act_as Casey Schaufler
2022-04-18 14:59 ` [PATCH v35 08/29] LSM: Use lsmblob in security_secctx_to_secid Casey Schaufler
2022-04-27 0:38 ` John Johansen
2022-04-18 14:59 ` [PATCH v35 09/29] LSM: Use lsmblob in security_secid_to_secctx Casey Schaufler
2022-04-18 14:59 ` [PATCH v35 10/29] LSM: Use lsmblob in security_ipc_getsecid Casey Schaufler
2022-04-18 14:59 ` [PATCH v35 11/29] LSM: Use lsmblob in security_current_getsecid Casey Schaufler
2022-04-18 14:59 ` [PATCH v35 12/29] LSM: Use lsmblob in security_inode_getsecid Casey Schaufler
2022-04-18 14:59 ` [PATCH v35 13/29] LSM: Use lsmblob in security_cred_getsecid Casey Schaufler
2022-04-18 18:02 ` kernel test robot
2022-04-19 0:41 ` kernel test robot
2022-04-19 0:51 ` kernel test robot
2022-04-18 14:59 ` [PATCH v35 14/29] LSM: Specify which LSM to display Casey Schaufler
2022-04-18 14:59 ` [PATCH v35 15/29] LSM: Ensure the correct LSM context releaser Casey Schaufler
2022-04-18 14:59 ` [PATCH v35 16/29] LSM: Use lsmcontext in security_secid_to_secctx Casey Schaufler
2022-04-18 14:59 ` [PATCH v35 17/29] LSM: Use lsmcontext in security_inode_getsecctx Casey Schaufler
2022-04-18 14:59 ` [PATCH v35 18/29] LSM: security_secid_to_secctx in netlink netfilter Casey Schaufler
2022-04-18 14:59 ` [PATCH v35 19/29] NET: Store LSM netlabel data in a lsmblob Casey Schaufler
2022-04-18 14:59 ` [PATCH v35 20/29] binder: Pass LSM identifier for confirmation Casey Schaufler
2022-04-18 14:59 ` [PATCH v35 21/29] LSM: Extend security_secid_to_secctx to include module selection Casey Schaufler
2022-04-25 23:32 ` John Johansen
2022-04-18 14:59 ` [PATCH v35 22/29] Audit: Keep multiple LSM data in audit_names Casey Schaufler
2022-04-25 23:32 ` John Johansen
2022-04-26 17:57 ` Paul Moore
2022-04-18 14:59 ` [PATCH v35 23/29] Audit: Create audit_stamp structure Casey Schaufler
2022-04-25 23:31 ` John Johansen
2022-04-26 18:03 ` Paul Moore
2022-04-26 18:58 ` John Johansen
2022-04-26 19:18 ` Paul Moore
2022-04-27 15:49 ` Casey Schaufler
2022-04-27 16:02 ` Paul Moore
2022-04-27 20:55 ` Casey Schaufler
2022-04-18 14:59 ` [PATCH v35 24/29] LSM: Add a function to report multiple LSMs Casey Schaufler
2022-04-22 16:26 ` Paul Moore
2022-04-25 23:33 ` John Johansen
2022-04-18 14:59 ` [PATCH v35 25/29] Audit: Allow multiple records in an audit_buffer Casey Schaufler
2022-04-22 16:27 ` Paul Moore
2022-04-26 1:06 ` John Johansen
2022-04-26 18:12 ` Paul Moore
2022-04-26 19:01 ` John Johansen
2022-04-18 14:59 ` [PATCH v35 26/29] Audit: Add record for multiple task security contexts Casey Schaufler
2022-04-22 16:28 ` Paul Moore
2022-04-26 1:08 ` John Johansen
2022-04-26 18:15 ` Paul Moore
2022-04-26 19:07 ` John Johansen
2022-04-18 14:59 ` [PATCH v35 27/29] Audit: Add record for multiple object contexts Casey Schaufler
2022-04-22 16:29 ` Paul Moore
2022-04-26 3:37 ` John Johansen
2022-04-26 18:57 ` Paul Moore
2022-04-26 19:24 ` John Johansen
2022-04-18 14:59 ` [PATCH v35 28/29] LSM: Add /proc attr entry for full LSM context Casey Schaufler
2022-04-22 8:37 ` John Johansen
2022-04-18 14:59 ` [PATCH v35 29/29] AppArmor: Remove the exclusive flag 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=0673dfee-4968-9b72-dd4e-b5fdffac0a7d@canonical.com \
--to=john.johansen@canonical.com \
--cc=casey.schaufler@intel.com \
--cc=casey@schaufler-ca.com \
--cc=jmorris@namei.org \
--cc=keescook@chromium.org \
--cc=linux-audit@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=paul@paul-moore.com \
--cc=penguin-kernel@i-love.sakura.ne.jp \
--cc=selinux@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=stephen.smalley.work@gmail.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