Re: [v0 PATCH 1/1] Only call role_fix_callback for base.p_roles during expansion.

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Applied in master.

On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 10:05 AM, Steve Lawrence <slawrence@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 08/02/2011 06:03 AM, Harry Ciao wrote:
>> expand_role_attributes() would merge the sub role attribute's roles
>> ebitmap into that of the parent, then clear it off from the parent's
>> roles ebitmap. This supports the assertion in role_fix_callback() that
>> any role attribute's roles ebitmap contains just regular roles.
>>
>> expand_role_attribute() works on base.p_roles table but not any
>> block/decl's p_roles table, so the above assertion in role_fix_callback
>> could fail when it is called for block/decl and some role attribute is
>> added into another.
>>
>> Since the effect of get_local_role() would have been complemented by
>> the populate_roleattributes() at the end of the link phase, there is
>> no needs(and wrong) to call role_fix_callback() for block/decl in the
>> expand phase.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Harry Ciao <qingtao.cao@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>>  libsepol/src/expand.c |    3 ---
>>  1 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/libsepol/src/expand.c b/libsepol/src/expand.c
>> index b42acbe..96ed473 100644
>> --- a/libsepol/src/expand.c
>> +++ b/libsepol/src/expand.c
>> @@ -2832,9 +2832,6 @@ int expand_module(sepol_handle_t * handle,
>>               if (hashtab_map
>>                   (decl->p_roles.table, role_copy_callback, &state))
>>                       goto cleanup;
>> -             if (hashtab_map
>> -                 (decl->p_roles.table, role_fix_callback, &state))
>> -                     goto cleanup;
>>
>>               /* copy users */
>>               if (hashtab_map
>
> This looks good, and I'm fine with committing this.
>
> However, I did find what appears to be an unrelated problem. It looks
> like the role attributes are getting written to the policy db as if they
> were roles. I don't think this will break anything (I think), but
> considering that the kernel doesn't know anything about role_attributes,
> it seems odd to me that they are in the binary.
>
> Note: I found this by looking at a downgraded policy.24 in apol, so this
> could potentially be a downgrade issue. But from looking at the code, I
> believe role attributes are being written as if they're roles.
>
> - Steve
>
> --
> 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.
>


--
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.


[Index of Archives]     [Selinux Refpolicy]     [Linux SGX]     [Fedora Users]     [Fedora Desktop]     [Yosemite Photos]     [Yosemite Camping]     [Yosemite Campsites]     [KDE Users]     [Gnome Users]

  Powered by Linux