On Fri, 2017-03-31 at 15:36 +0200, Dominick Grift wrote: > On Fri, Mar 31, 2017 at 09:30:56AM -0400, Stephen Smalley wrote: > > On Fri, 2017-03-31 at 09:25 -0400, Stephen Smalley wrote: > > > On Fri, 2017-03-31 at 14:09 +0200, Dominick Grift wrote: > > > > I vaguely recall that we discussed this issue or at least that > > > > i > > > > mentioned it here but i can't recall the outcome if any: > > > > > > > > So today on my rawhide system i noticed that i somehow forgot > > > > to > > > > add > > > > support for the smc_socket class (i suspect that is part of the > > > > extended socket class patches) > > > > > > > > I added the class (which i suppose is unordered like the othe > > > > extended socket classes) but as soon as I loaded up the policy > > > > with > > > > the new unordered smc_socket class the system became unusable. > > > > > > > > This is because the dbus object manager became confused due to > > > > my > > > > adding a new (unordered) class at runtime, and that the dbus > > > > class > > > > was no longer working. > > > > > > > > Modern systems heavily rely on dbus at the heart and so it is > > > > undesire-able that this happens. > > > > > > > > A reboot clears this issue up but adding (unordered) classes at > > > > runtime should not cause these issues i suspect > > > > > > dbusd doesn't use selinux_check_access() and therefore does not > > > yet > > > support reordering of their classes/permissions at runtime. The > > > same > > > is true of all userspace object managers created before > > > selinux_check_access() was introduced - anything that directly > > > calls > > > security_compute_av() or avc_has_perm(). dbusd does call > > > selinux_set_mapping() at startup, so it can correctly handle > > > reordering of classes/permissions across restarts, but not while > > > it > > > is > > > running. Calling selinux_set_mapping() again upon policy reloads > > > (e.g. > > > from policy_reload_callback() if (event == AVC_CALLBACK_RESET) > > > before > > > returning) may fix this problem, but requires proper > > > locking. Even > > > better would be to rid the dbusd selinux implementation of > > > threading > > > entirely, see https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=92831# > > > c4 > > Thank you, I suppose i should take this to them then. No, someone who uses SELinux will need to develop a patch and test it for them; dbusd maintainer doesn't use SELinux himself. Looks like I'm also wrong about being able to call selinux_set_mapping() from an AVC callback, since selinux_set_mapping() itself calls avc_reset() to flush any cache entries before reloading the mapping, so that would produce infinite recursion. Sigh. Could change selinux_set_mapping() to not do that in libselinux, but that won't help on existing releases. Maybe we should just convert it over to using selinux_check_access() and drop all direct usage of the AVC. > > > > > > smc_socket was added by the kernel developers as part of the > > > merge > > > with > > > net-next since we now trigger a build failure in the kernel if > > > any > > > new > > > address families are introduced without adding a corresponding > > > security > > > class (so that SELinux always supports a separate class per > > > network > > > address family going forward). So there have been no policy > > > patches > > > submitted yet to define it in refpolicy even AFAIK. > > > > > > [1] https://github.com/SELinuxProject/selinux/issues/34 > > So i suppose its an unordered class? or do i have to order this one > to avoid future issues? > > > > > BTW, I'm not sure what you did to trigger the problem. When I > > tested > > the extended socket classes, I added them to my running policy via > > a > > CIL module like this: > > Well i just added this commit (ignore the typo in the name) which > adds the new class to the unordered socket list > > https://github.com/DefenSec/dssp2-base/commit/5e3ada7d12525c8c659f347 > 863f09ec9caeceb56 > > then i built rpms using this script: > > https://github.com/DefenSec/dssp2-standard/blob/master/support/rpm/ds > sp2-standard.sh > > and just rpm -Uvh the new rpm > > > > > (policycap extended_socket_class) > > > > (classcommon sctp_socket socket) > > (class sctp_socket (node_bind)) > > > > <snip> > > > > (classcommon qipcrtr_socket socket) > > (class qipcrtr_socket ()) > > > > (classorder (unordered sctp_socket icmp_socket ax25_socket > > ipx_socket > > netrom_socket bridge_socket atmpvc_socket x25_socket rose_socket > > decnet_socket atmsvc_socket rds_socket irda_socket pppox_socket > > llc_socket ib_socket mpls_socket can_socket tipc_socket > > bluetooth_socket iucv_socket rxrpc_socket isdn_socket phonet_socket > > ieee802154_socket caif_socket alg_socket nfc_socket vsock_socket > > kcm_socket qipcrtr_socket)) > > > > The classorder statement at the end ensured that they were appended > > to > > the end of the class list and therefore did not break anything. > > Looks like you failed to include a classorder statement for it as I did above. That's still required to avoid breaking legacy userspace object managers. _______________________________________________ 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.
