You may add my Ack to the series. -Eric On Wed, Dec 19, 2012 at 11:58 AM, Paul Moore <pmoore@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Wednesday, December 19, 2012 01:46:25 PM Jason Wang wrote: >> On 12/19/2012 07:08 AM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: >> > On Tue, Dec 18, 2012 at 05:53:52PM -0500, Paul Moore wrote: >> >> This patch corrects some problems with LSM/SELinux that were introduced >> >> with the multiqueue patchset. The problem stems from the fact that the >> >> multiqueue work changed the relationship between the tun device and its >> >> associated socket; before the socket persisted for the life of the >> >> device, however after the multiqueue changes the socket only persisted >> >> for the life of the userspace connection (fd open). For non-persistent >> >> devices this is not an issue, but for persistent devices this can cause >> >> the tun device to lose its SELinux label. >> >> >> >> We correct this problem by adding an opaque LSM security blob to the >> >> tun device struct which allows us to have the LSM security state, e.g. >> >> SELinux labeling information, persist for the lifetime of the tun >> >> device. In the process we tweak the LSM hooks to work with this new >> >> approach to TUN device/socket labeling and introduce a new LSM hook, >> >> security_tun_dev_attach_queue(), to approve requests to attach to a >> >> TUN queue via TUNSETQUEUE. >> >> >> >> The SELinux code has been adjusted to match the new LSM hooks, the >> >> other LSMs do not make use of the LSM TUN controls. This patch makes >> >> use of the recently added "tun_socket:attach_queue" permission to >> >> restrict access to the TUNSETQUEUE operation. On older SELinux >> >> policies which do not define the "tun_socket:attach_queue" permission >> >> the access control decision for TUNSETQUEUE will be handled according >> >> to the SELinux policy's unknown permission setting. >> >> >> >> Signed-off-by: Paul Moore <pmoore@xxxxxxxxxx> >> > >> > Looks good to me. A comment not directly related to this patch, below. >> >> Good to me too, will do some test on this. > > Great. I'll do some more testing and make sure the LSM and SELinux crowd are > okay with the changes. > > -- > paul moore > security and virtualization @ redhat > > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-security-module" in > the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html -- 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.
