On Wed, 2009-10-07 at 15:34 +0200, Jim Meyering wrote:
> Stephen Smalley wrote:
>
> > On Wed, 2009-10-07 at 14:48 +0200, Jim Meyering wrote:
> >> Stephen Smalley wrote:
> >> ...
> >> > FWIW, there is a subtle difference here:
> >> > - chcon can in fact work on a SELinux-disabled kernel, as you can still
> >> > set the security.* extended attributes as long as the filesystem
> >> > provides handlers for the security.* namespace.
> >> > - runcon cannot work without a SELinux-enabled kernel, as only a
> >> > SELinux-enabled kernel allows you to set the security context of a
> >> > running process.
> >> >
> >> > So by preventing chcon from running in the SELinux-disabled case, you
> >> > are imposing a restriction above and beyond what is strictly required.
> >> > The user can of course still use setfattr -n security.selinux -v
> >> > <context> <path> to set a SELinux security context on a file when
> >> > SELinux is disabled, or can run the setfiles program to set SELinux
> >> > security contexts on an entire file tree even when SELinux is disabled.
> >> ...
> >> >> diff --git a/src/chcon.c b/src/chcon.c
> >> >> index fbfdb4d..c0da694 100644
> >> >> --- a/src/chcon.c
> >> >> +++ b/src/chcon.c
> >> >> @@ -519,6 +519,10 @@ main (int argc, char **argv)
> >> >> usage (EXIT_FAILURE);
> >> >> }
> >> >>
> >> >> + if (is_selinux_enabled () != 1)
> >> >> + error (EXIT_FAILURE, 0,
> >> >> + _("%s may be used only on a SELinux kernel"), program_name);
> >> >> +
> >>
> >> Thanks for the tip.
> >> I'll revert that part of the patch.
> >>
> >> I'll address the original problem by adding
> >> getfilecon and lgetfilecon wrappers that
> >> map those unusual cases (10,"unlabeled" and 0,NULL)
> >> to a return value of -1 with errno == ENOTSUPP.
> >
> > I'd suggest ENODATA instead - that means that the filesystem supports
> > attributes but there was no value set for the particular file.
>
> ENODATA makes sense for the 10,"unlabeled" case.
> I viewed "using a library so old that its getfilecon
> can return 0 and set context to NULL" as lacking support (ENOTSUPP).
> But I'll do whatever is more consistent with the rest of SELinux.
Ah, I see - we did change getfilecon() in libselinux in 2007 to check
for a return value of zero from getxattr() and map that to -1 with errno
EOPNOTSUPP. That was to address a change/regression in the kernel that
caused getxattr() on /proc/sys nodes to return 0. So I guess EOPNOTSUPP
aka ENOTSUP is fine for the zero-return case.
--
Stephen Smalley
National Security Agency
--
This message was distributed to subscribers of the selinux mailing list.
If you no longer wish to subscribe, send mail to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with
the words "unsubscribe selinux" without quotes as the message.
