Re: [RFC][PATCH] selinux: Remove unused permission definitions

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

 



On 11/21/2016 03:48 PM, Nick Kralevich wrote:
> 
> 
> On Mon, Jun 15, 2015 at 5:41 AM, Stephen Smalley <sds@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> <mailto:sds@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
> 
>     On 06/14/2015 01:33 AM, Dominick Grift wrote:
>     > On Wed, May 27, 2015 at 11:03:25AM -0400, Stephen Smalley wrote:
>     >> Remove unused permission definitions from SELinux.
>     >> Many of these were only ever used in pre-mainline
>     >> versions of SELinux, prior to Linux 2.6.0.  Some of them
>     >> were used in the legacy network or compat_net=1 checks
>     >> that were disabled by default in Linux 2.6.18 and
>     >> fully removed in Linux 2.6.30.
>     >>
>     >> Permissions never used in mainline Linux:
>     >> file swapon
>     >
>     > I think that blk_file (fixed disk) swapon is actually used in my policy by fstools (i think swapon command)
> 
>     It isn't checked anywhere in the SELinux kernel code, so it might be
>     defined in your policy but it has no meaning.  The LSM hook and SELinux
>     hook function implementation that applied the check was never merged
>     into mainline.
> 
> 
> Why was the LSM hook and SELinux hook function implementation for swapon
> never mainlined? 
> 
> In particular, without some kind of swapon check, a process with
> CAP_SYS_ADMIN could take any readable-writeable file, call swapon on the
> file, force swapping, and gain read-write access to another process memory. 
> 
> Can we try to get these patches mainlined again?

I think it just wasn't a high priority, since the operation was already
being controlled via CAP_SYS_ADMIN (and thus also SELinux :capability
sys_admin check) and there wasn't a clear use case for distinguishing
it.  Given that there are over 500 CAP_SYS_ADMIN checks in the kernel,
it is unclear how much we would gain by separately restricting just
swapon.  A more comprehensive audit of all CAP_SYS_ADMIN checks and
adding finer-grained LSM hooks and/or new finer-grained capabilities
would likely be useful, but is not a trivial undertaking.  One can
disable swap altogether via CONFIG_SWAP=n if you don't need that
functionality at all.




_______________________________________________
Selinux mailing list
Selinux@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe, send email to Selinux-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxx.
To get help, send an email containing "help" to Selinux-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx.



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

  Powered by Linux