Re: [PATCH v2] default_range glblub implementation

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

 



On Wed, Aug 28, 2019 at 6:31 PM Paul Moore <paul@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Aug 28, 2019 at 4:43 PM Joshua Brindle
> <joshua.brindle@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > A policy developer can now specify glblub as a default_range default and
> > the computed transition will be the intersection of the mls range of
> > the two contexts.
> >
> > The glb (greatest lower bound) lub (lowest upper bound) of a range is calculated
> > as the greater of the low sensitivities and the lower of the high sensitivities
> > and the and of each category bitmap.
> >
> > This can be used by MLS solution developers to compute a context that satisfies,
> > for example, the range of a network interface and the range of a user logging in.
> >
> > Some examples are:
> >
> > User Permitted Range | Network Device Label | Computed Label
> > ---------------------|----------------------|----------------
> > S0-S1:c0.c12         | S0                   | S0
> > S0-S1:c0.c12         | S0-S1:c0.c1024       | S0-S1:c0.c12
> > S0-S4:c0.c512        | S1-S1:c0.c1024       | S1-S1:c0.c512
> > S0-S16:c0,c2         | S4-S6:c0.c128        | S4-S6:c0,c2
> > S0-S4                | S2-S6                | S2-S4
> > S0-S4                | S5-S8                | INVALID
> > S5-S8                | S0-S4                | INVALID
> > S6:c0,c2-S7:c4,c5    | S0:c2,c4-S6:c5.c100  | S6:c2-S6:c5
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Joshua Brindle <joshua.brindle@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> >  security/selinux/include/security.h |  3 ++-
> >  security/selinux/ss/context.h       | 28 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >  security/selinux/ss/ebitmap.c       | 18 ++++++++++++++++++
> >  security/selinux/ss/ebitmap.h       |  1 +
> >  security/selinux/ss/mls.c           |  2 ++
> >  security/selinux/ss/policydb.c      |  5 +++++
> >  security/selinux/ss/policydb.h      |  1 +
> >  7 files changed, 57 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> You incorporated some feedback from the v1 patch, but you ignored
> some, can you explain why?
>

I apologize, I missed a couple C++ style comments, I'll fix those and
resend, was there anything else? I thought I addressed all of the
technical concerns.

> For reference, here are my comments on your first patch:
> * https://lore.kernel.org/selinux/CAHC9VhRXyRDjj3KJDHvA4ruJg6H+1kzFPzfA-PLZ-NqBicsLrw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx/
>
> --
> paul moore
> www.paul-moore.com



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

  Powered by Linux