From: Chris Wright <chrisw@osdl.org>
To: Pablo Neira <pablo@eurodev.net>
Cc: Chris Wright <chrisw@osdl.org>,
netdev@oss.sgi.com, davem@davemloft.net, jmorris@redhat.com,
sds@epoch.ncsc.mil, serue@us.ibm.com
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 2/3] netlink check sender, audit
Date: Mon, 14 Feb 2005 16:11:32 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20050215001132.GA27645@shell0.pdx.osdl.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <420E334B.8060805@eurodev.net>
* Pablo Neira (pablo@eurodev.net) wrote:
> Chris Wright wrote:
> >+static int audit_check_sender(struct sk_buff *skb)
> >{
> >- int err = 0;
> >+ struct nlmsghdr *nlh;
> >+ u16 msg_type;
> >+ int err = -EINVAL;
> >
> >+ if (skb->len < NLMSG_LENGTH(0))
> >+ goto out;
> >+
> >+ nlh = (struct nlmsghdr *)skb->data;
> >+ msg_type = nlh->nlmsg_type;
>
> You're introducing some kind of check for malformed packets here as
> well, don't you think that such thing should be done by the receiver ?
This has to be done to make the capability check meaningful, as it's
different per msg type. Need to have a valid header to check msg type.
> I also see another option which is passing as parameter such function
> which check for capabilities/audit stuff to my netlink_process_skb
> function, calling it before process_msg. But in that case, the packet
> sent by a sender that doesn't has the right to was already enqueued. I
> understand that this is exactly what you are trying to avoid.
That's how it's done now. The purpose of this patch is to guarantee the
check is done in the sender's context to avoid having to add values to
the control buffer to support protocol specific data (such as loginuid
in this case of audit).
thanks,
-chris
--
Linux Security Modules http://lsm.immunix.org http://lsm.bkbits.net
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2005-02-15 0:11 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2005-02-12 9:01 [RFC][PATCH 0/3] netlink check sender Chris Wright
2005-02-12 9:02 ` [RFC][PATCH 1/3] " Chris Wright
2005-02-12 9:05 ` [RFC][PATCH 2/3] netlink check sender, audit Chris Wright
2005-02-12 9:06 ` [RFC][PATCH 3/3] netlink check sender, rtnetlink Chris Wright
2005-02-12 16:48 ` [RFC][PATCH 2/3] netlink check sender, audit Pablo Neira
2005-02-12 21:41 ` Pablo Neira
2005-02-14 13:08 ` Stephen Smalley
2005-02-15 0:13 ` Chris Wright
2005-02-15 2:29 ` Pablo Neira
2005-02-15 2:36 ` Pablo Neira
2005-02-15 3:47 ` Chris Wright
2005-02-15 22:19 ` Pablo Neira
2005-02-15 22:22 ` Chris Wright
2005-02-15 22:27 ` Pablo Neira
2005-02-16 0:11 ` Chris Wright
2005-02-16 3:42 ` James Morris
2005-02-15 0:11 ` Chris Wright [this message]
2005-02-14 12:59 ` [RFC][PATCH 1/3] netlink check sender Stephen Smalley
2005-02-14 13:05 ` Stephen Smalley
2005-02-15 0:22 ` Chris Wright
2005-02-15 0:17 ` Chris Wright
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=20050215001132.GA27645@shell0.pdx.osdl.net \
--to=chrisw@osdl.org \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=jmorris@redhat.com \
--cc=netdev@oss.sgi.com \
--cc=pablo@eurodev.net \
--cc=sds@epoch.ncsc.mil \
--cc=serue@us.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).