I have been experimenting with using a quorum disk with the RH cluster
suite product (qdiskd in the cman RPM). One of the requirements of
using qdiskd is that you must specify at least one command that can be
run to test the health of the node.
A typical command to use for this heuristic is ping, although any
command that returns a 0/non-0 exit status is acceptable.
When I configure a simple ping test with qdisk I get:
type=AVC msg=audit(1219960233.627:4561): avc: denied { read write } for pid=23174 comm="ping" path="/dev/sda4" dev=tmpfs ino=1051 scontext=root:system_r:ping_t:s0 tcontext=system_u:object_
r:fixed_disk_device_t:s0 tclass=blk_file
type=AVC msg=audit(1219960233.627:4561): avc: denied { read write } for pid=23174 comm="ping" path="/dev/sdb4" dev=tmpfs ino=985 scontext=root:system_r:ping_t:s0 tcontext=system_u:object_r
:fixed_disk_device_t:s0 tclass=blk_file
type=SYSCALL msg=audit(1219960233.627:4561): arch=c000003e syscall=59 success=yes exit=0 a0=1f3575a0 a1=1f357610 a2=1f356150 a3=3 items=0 ppid=23163 pid=23174 auid=0 uid=0 gid=0 euid=0 suid=0
fsuid=0 egid=0 sgid=0 fsgid=0 tty=(none) ses=189 comm="ping" exe="/bin/ping" subj=root:system_r:ping_t:s0 key=(null)
The test is: "/bin/ping -c1 -t1 x.x.x.x" where x.x.x.x is a
known-reachable IP. This works without AVC denials from the command
line.
Interestingly, the ping command seems to complete and return an exit
code properly to qdisk as the log message shows that it is up.
I have used audit2allow which told me I could do:
allow ping_t fixed_disk_device_t:blk_file { read write };
and silence the message, but somehow giving ping access to
fixed_disk_device_t to quiet a log message seems like it defeats the
spirit of limited access :)
I have no idea why ping (I am assuming that I am reading it correctly
and it is ping) would be trying to access /dev/sda4 or /dev/sdb4. Those
partitions are the extended partition container on my software RAID-1
boot drives. I've poked briefly at the qdiskd code and it seems to do a
normal fork/exec to invoke the ping.
Has anyone seen anything like this or have any ideas on where I should
look next? I've spent a while on it so far and I don't have a lot more
time to spend on it, but I'd like to solve it if possible and (if
needed) get a fix out somewhere.
I have been doing my testing with the RHEL versions of these tools as I
don't have a cluster of Fedora machines handy, but I couldn't find a
RHEL SELinux list and this looked like the best bet.
selinux-policy-targeted-2.4.6-137.1.el5
cman-2.0.84-2.el5
I'm still pretty new to trying to sift through SELinux policy/messages
so please be patient with me. :)
Thanks!
Sean
--
fedora-selinux-list mailing list
fedora-selinux-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-selinux-list
