On Thu, Aug 9, 2018 at 3:56 AM Paul Moore <paul@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Aug 6, 2018 at 5:19 PM Jann Horn <jannh@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > The intended behavior change for this patch is to reject any MLS strings
> > that contain (trailing) garbage if p->mls_enabled is true.
> >
> > As suggested by Paul Moore, change mls_context_to_sid() so that the two
> > parts of the range are extracted before the rest of the parsing. Because
> > now we don't have to scan for two different separators simultaneously
> > everywhere, we can actually switch to strchr() everywhere instead of the
> > open-coded loops that scan for two separators at once.
> >
> > mls_context_to_sid() used to signal how much of the input string was parsed
> > by updating `*scontext`. However, there is actually no case in which
> > mls_context_to_sid() only parses a subset of the input and still returns
> > a success (other than the buggy case with a second '-' in which it
> > incorrectly claims to have consumed the entire string). Turn `scontext`
> > into a simple pointer argument and stop redundantly checking whether the
> > entire input was consumed in string_to_context_struct(). This also lets us
> > remove the `scontext_len` argument from `string_to_context_struct()`.
[...]
> > - /* Extract low sensitivity. */
> > - scontextp = p = *scontext;
> > - while (*p && *p != ':' && *p != '-')
> > - p++;
> > -
> > - delim = *p;
> > - if (delim != '\0')
> > - *p++ = '\0';
> > + /*
> > + * If we're dealing with a range, figure out where the two parts
> > + * of the range begin.
> > + */
> > + rangep[0] = scontext;
> > + rangep[1] = strchr(scontext, '-');
> > + if (rangep[1]) {
> > + rangep[1][0] = '\0';
> > + rangep[1]++;
> > + }
> >
> > + /* For each part of the range: */
> > for (l = 0; l < 2; l++) {
> > - levdatum = hashtab_search(pol->p_levels.table, scontextp);
> > - if (!levdatum) {
> > - rc = -EINVAL;
> > - goto out;
> > - }
> > + /* Split sensitivity and category set. */
> > + sensitivity = rangep[l];
> > + if (sensitivity == NULL)
> > + break;
> > + next_cat = strchr(sensitivity, ':');
> > + if (next_cat)
> > + *(next_cat++) = '\0';
> >
> > + /* Parse sensitivity. */
> > + levdatum = hashtab_search(pol->p_levels.table, sensitivity);
> > + if (!levdatum)
> > + return -EINVAL;
> > context->range.level[l].sens = levdatum->level->sens;
> >
> > - if (delim == ':') {
> > - /* Extract category set. */
> > - while (1) {
> > - scontextp = p;
> > - while (*p && *p != ',' && *p != '-')
> > - p++;
> > - delim = *p;
> > - if (delim != '\0')
> > - *p++ = '\0';
> > -
> > - /* Separate into range if exists */
> > - rngptr = strchr(scontextp, '.');
> > - if (rngptr != NULL) {
> > - /* Remove '.' */
> > - *rngptr++ = '\0';
> > - }
> > + /* Extract category set. */
> > + while (next_cat != NULL) {
> > + cur_cat = next_cat;
> > + next_cat = strchr(next_cat, ',');
> > + if (next_cat != NULL)
> > + *(next_cat++) = '\0';
> > +
> > + /* Separate into range if exists */
> > + rngptr = strchr(cur_cat, '.');
> > + if (rngptr != NULL) {
> > + /* Remove '.' */
>
> On the chance you need to respin this patch, you can probably get rid
> of the above comment and the if-body braces; we don't have "Remove X"
> comments in other similar places in this function.
I'll amend that.
> > + *rngptr++ = '\0';
> > + }
> >
> > - catdatum = hashtab_search(pol->p_cats.table,
> > - scontextp);
> > - if (!catdatum) {
> > - rc = -EINVAL;
> > - goto out;
> > - }
> > + catdatum = hashtab_search(pol->p_cats.table, cur_cat);
> > + if (!catdatum)
> > + return -EINVAL;
> >
> > - rc = ebitmap_set_bit(&context->range.level[l].cat,
> > - catdatum->value - 1, 1);
> > - if (rc)
> > - goto out;
> > -
> > - /* If range, set all categories in range */
> > - if (rngptr) {
> > - int i;
> > -
> > - rngdatum = hashtab_search(pol->p_cats.table, rngptr);
> > - if (!rngdatum) {
> > - rc = -EINVAL;
> > - goto out;
> > - }
> > -
> > - if (catdatum->value >= rngdatum->value) {
> > - rc = -EINVAL;
> > - goto out;
> > - }
> > -
> > - for (i = catdatum->value; i < rngdatum->value; i++) {
> > - rc = ebitmap_set_bit(&context->range.level[l].cat, i, 1);
> > - if (rc)
> > - goto out;
> > - }
> > - }
> > + rc = ebitmap_set_bit(&context->range.level[l].cat,
> > + catdatum->value - 1, 1);
> > + if (rc)
> > + return rc;
> > +
> > + /* If range, set all categories in range */
> > + if (rngptr == NULL)
> > + continue;
> > +
> > + rngdatum = hashtab_search(pol->p_cats.table, rngptr);
> > + if (!rngdatum)
> > + return -EINVAL;
> > +
> > + if (catdatum->value >= rngdatum->value)
> > + return -EINVAL;
> >
> > - if (delim != ',')
> > - break;
> > + for (i = catdatum->value; i < rngdatum->value; i++) {
> > + rc = ebitmap_set_bit(&context->range.level[l].cat, i, 1);
> > + if (rc)
> > + return rc;
> > }
> > }
> > - if (delim == '-') {
> > - /* Extract high sensitivity. */
> > - scontextp = p;
> > - while (*p && *p != ':')
> > - p++;
> > -
> > - delim = *p;
> > - if (delim != '\0')
> > - *p++ = '\0';
> > - } else
> > - break;
> > }
> >
> > - if (l == 0) {
> > + /* If we didn't see a '-', the range start is also the range end. */
> > + if (rangep[1] == NULL) {
> > context->range.level[1].sens = context->range.level[0].sens;
> > rc = ebitmap_cpy(&context->range.level[1].cat,
> > &context->range.level[0].cat);
> > if (rc)
> > - goto out;
> > + return rc;
> > }
> > - *scontext = ++p;
> > - rc = 0;
> > -out:
> > - return rc;
> > +
> > + return 0;
>
> In the case where we have a MLS policy loaded (pol->mls_enabled != 0)
> and scontext is empty (scontext[0] = '\0'), we could end up returning
> 0 couldn't we? It seems like we might want a quick check for this
> before we parse the low/high portions of the field into the rangep
> array.
I don't think so. In the first loop iteration, `sensitivity` will be
an empty string, and so the hashtab_search() should return NULL,
leading to -EINVAL. Am I missing something?
> As an aside, I believe my other comments on this patch still stand.
> It's a nice improvement but I think there are some other small things
> that need to be addressed.
Is there anything I need to fix apart from the overly verbose comment
and the unnecessary curly braces?
_______________________________________________
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.
