On Mon, Apr 27, 2020 at 12:48 PM Stephen Smalley <stephen.smalley.work@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Mon, Apr 27, 2020 at 12:19 PM Casey Schaufler <casey@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > On 4/23/2020 3:24 PM, Casey Schaufler wrote: > > > On 4/22/2020 10:12 AM, Casey Schaufler wrote: > > >> On 4/22/2020 9:55 AM, James Morris wrote: > > >>> On Mon, 13 Apr 2020, Daniel Colascione wrote: > > >>> > > >>>> On Wed, Apr 1, 2020 at 2:39 PM Daniel Colascione <dancol@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > >>>>> Changes from the fourth version of the patch: > > >>>> Is there anything else that needs to be done before merging this patch series? > > > Do you have a test case that exercises this feature? > > > > I haven't heard anything back. What would cause this code to be executed? > > See https://lore.kernel.org/selinux/513f6230-1fb3-dbb5-5f75-53cd02b91b28@xxxxxxxxxxxxx/ > for example. NB The example cited above needs to be tweaked for changes in the logic from the original RFC patch on which the example was based. In particular, the userfaultfd CIL policy needs to be updated to define and use the new anon_inode class and to allow create permission as follows. $ cat userfaultfd.cil (class anon_inode ()) (classcommon anon_inode file) (classorder (unordered anon_inode)) (type uffd_t) ; Label the UFFD with uffd_t; this can be specialized per domain (typetransition unconfined_t unconfined_t anon_inode "[userfaultfd]" uffd_t) (allow unconfined_t uffd_t (anon_inode (create))) ; Permit read() and ioctl() on the UFFD. ; Comment out if you want to test read or basic ioctl enforcement. (allow unconfined_t uffd_t (anon_inode (read))) (allow unconfined_t uffd_t (anon_inode (ioctl))) ; Uncomment one of the allowx lines below to test ioctl whitelisting. ; Currently the 1st one is uncommented; comment that out if trying another. ; None (allowx unconfined_t uffd_t (ioctl anon_inode ((0x00)))) ; UFFDIO_API ;(allowx unconfined_t uffd_t (ioctl anon_inode ((0xaa3f))))
