From: "Paul Moore" <paul.moore@hp.com>
To: shemminger@linux-foundation.org
Cc: sds@tycho.nsa.gov, linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org,
viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
jmorris@namei.org
Subject: Re: Real networking namespace
Date: Sat, 10 Oct 2009 17:40:27 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <7264578776.939663627@hp.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20091009190820.0a0f09c2@nehalam>
------- Original message -------
> From: Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@linux-foundation.org>
> Cc: sds@tycho.nsa.gov, linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org,
> viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk, netdev@vger.kernel.org, jmorris@namei.org
> Sent: 10/9, 22:08
>
> On Fri, 9 Oct 2009 18:12:15 -0400
> Paul Moore <paul.moore@hp.com> wrote:
>
>> On Friday 09 October 2009 12:44:52 pm Stephen Smalley wrote:
>> > On Fri, 2009-10-09 at 12:37 -0400, Stephen Smalley wrote:
>> > > On Fri, 2009-10-09 at 08:38 -0700, Stephen Hemminger wrote:
>> > > > The existing networking namespace model is unattractive for what I
>> > > > want, has anyone investigated better alternatives?
>> > > >
>> > > > I would like to be able to allow access to a network interface and
>> > > > associated objects (routing tables etc), to be controlled by
>> Mandatory
>> > > > Access Control API's. I.e grant access to eth0 and to only certain
>> > > > processes. Some the issues with the existing models are:
>> > > > * eth0 and associated objects don't really exist in filesystem
>> so
>> > > > not subject to LSM style control (SeLinux/SMACK/TOMOYO)
>>
>> As Stephen points out, SELinux does have the ability to assign security
>> labels
>> to network interfaces, check out the 'semanage' command. A while back I
>> wrote
>> up something about the SELinux network "ingress/egress" access controls:
>>
>> * http://paulmoore.livejournal.com/2128.html
>
> I was hoping to be able to not have inaccessible interfaces visible,
> is it possible to not have interfaces show up in commands like:
> ip link show
> or sysfs?
I haven't looked at the code for 'ip' but I'm pretty sure it uses netlink
to configure the kernel, yes? If that is the case, no I don't believe any
of the current LSMs provide that level of granularity (netlink, generic
netlink in particular, is a bit of a problem spot at the moment). As for
sysfs, I don't believe we label the interface related files based on their
semanage labels but I could be wrong - we've got plenty of good people
already working on fs labeling so I spend most of my time worrying about
network labeling.
--
paul moore
linux @ hp
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-10-10 21:40 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-10-09 15:38 Real networking namespace Stephen Hemminger
2009-10-09 16:37 ` Stephen Smalley
2009-10-09 16:44 ` Stephen Smalley
2009-10-09 22:12 ` Paul Moore
2009-10-10 2:08 ` Stephen Hemminger
2009-10-10 21:40 ` Paul Moore [this message]
2009-10-10 18:14 ` 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=7264578776.939663627@hp.com \
--to=paul.moore@hp.com \
--cc=jmorris@namei.org \
--cc=linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=sds@tycho.nsa.gov \
--cc=shemminger@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
/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).