Re: Userspace AVC auditing on policy load

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

 



Richard Haines <richard_c_haines@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:

> On Wed, 2020-08-26 at 15:15 -0400, Chris PeBenito wrote:
>> On 8/26/20 3:07 PM, Dominick Grift wrote:
>>> Chris PeBenito <chpebeni@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>>>
>
>>>> On 8/26/20 10:46 AM, Stephen Smalley wrote:
>>>>> On Wed, Aug 26, 2020 at 10:35 AM Chris PeBenito
>>>>> <chpebeni@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>>>> On 8/26/20 9:25 AM, Chris PeBenito wrote:
>>>>>>> I was looking into this dbus-broker audit message, which
>>>>>>> has the wrong audit type:
>>>>>>>
>
>>>>>>> audit[422]: USER_AVC pid=422 uid=999 auid=4294967295
>>>>>>> ses=4294967295
>>>>>>> subj=system_u:system_r:system_dbusd_t msg='avc:  received
>>>>>>> policyload notice
>>>>>>> (seqno=2)
>>>>>>>
>
>>>>>>> This is due to dbus-broker setting their avc log callback
>>>>>>> to send USER_AVC audit
>>>>>>> messages for everything that comes to the libselinux log
>>>>>>> callback. I think the
>>>>>>> right thing to do there is to change it to emit
>>>>>>> USER_SELINUX_ERR audit messages
>>>>>>> if the log message is SELINUX_ERROR, otherwise log the
>>>>>>> message using their
>>>>>>> regular method (stderr I think).
>>>>>>>
>
>>>>>>> But the question became, why is the userspace AVC not
>>>>>>> simply emitting its own
>>>>>>> USER_MAC_POLICY_LOAD audit message instead of sending a
>>>>>>> message to the log
>>>>>>> callback?
>>>>>>
>
>>>>>> Ok, I missed that there is a SELINUX_AVC log type and that's
>>>>>> how the userspace
>>>>>> denial messages are sent out. How about adding
>>>>>> SELINUX_POLICYLOAD and
>>>>>> SELINUX_ENFORCE log types so that callers can emit
>>>>>> appropriate audit messages?
>>>>> Do we need two different new types or just one?  Otherwise, I
>>>>> don't
>>>>> have a problem with adding new ones as long as it doesn't break
>>>>> existing applications.
>>>>
>
>>>> Regarding the risk of breaking existing applications, I did some
>>>> checking on some userspace AVC users and what they do in their
>>>> log
>>>> callback:
>>>>
>
>>>> * systemd only audits SELINUX_AVC and SELINUX_ERROR messages and
>>>>    ignores others(as Petr noted)
>>>> * xorg-server audits SELINUX_AVC correctly but audits
>>>> SELINUX_INFO as
>>>>    USER_MAC_POLICY_LOAD and everything else it ignores the type
>>>> and
>>>>   audits as AUDIT_USER_SELINUX_ERR
>>>> * dbus-broker ignores type and audits everything as USER_AVC
>>>> * dbus-service ignores type and audits everything as USER AVC
>>>> * pam: pam_rootok ignores type and audits everything as USER_AVC
>>>> * sepgsql custom AVC implementation (this was news to me)
>>>> * shadow-utils only audits SELINUX_AVC and SELINUX_ERROR messages
>>>> and
>>>>    others go to syslog
>>>> * cronie: no callback set
>>>>
>
>>>> That's all the ones I could think of.  Which ones am I missing?
>>>
>
>>> Probably libreswan, AFAIK that one might also still be using
>>> avc_has_perm() instead of selinux_check_access().
>>
>
>> You're correct, it is still use avc_has_perm().  There is no log
>> callback set here.
>>
>
> ipsec-tools (racoon) is another. I did patches for this and LibreSwan
> a few years ago, they never went far:
>
> ipsec-tools:
> https://marc.info/?l=ipsec-tools-devel&m=149441917501329&w=2
> LibreSwan:
> https://lists.libreswan.org/pipermail/swan-dev/2017-May/001860.html
>
>

I visited #swan and reminded the maintainers of the libreswan patch,
they are going to address your patch.

ipsec-tools is dead and have CVE's and so not sure if there is any point
to that.

-- 
gpg --locate-keys dominick.grift@xxxxxxxxxxx
Key fingerprint = FCD2 3660 5D6B 9D27 7FC6  E0FF DA7E 521F 10F6 4098
https://sks-keyservers.net/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0xDA7E521F10F64098
Dominick Grift



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

  Powered by Linux