This is a note to let you know that I've just added the patch titled
selinux: process labeled IPsec TCP SYN-ACK packets properly in selinux_ip_postroute()
to the 3.10-stable tree which can be found at:
http://www.kernel.org/git/?p=linux/kernel/git/stable/stable-queue.git;a=summary
The filename of the patch is:
selinux-process-labeled-ipsec-tcp-syn-ack-packets-properly-in-selinux_ip_postroute.patch
and it can be found in the queue-3.10 subdirectory.
If you, or anyone else, feels it should not be added to the stable tree,
please let <stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> know about it.
>From c0828e50485932b7e019df377a6b0a8d1ebd3080 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Paul Moore <pmoore@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2013 14:58:01 -0500
Subject: selinux: process labeled IPsec TCP SYN-ACK packets properly in selinux_ip_postroute()
From: Paul Moore <pmoore@xxxxxxxxxx>
commit c0828e50485932b7e019df377a6b0a8d1ebd3080 upstream.
Due to difficulty in arriving at the proper security label for
TCP SYN-ACK packets in selinux_ip_postroute(), we need to check packets
while/before they are undergoing XFRM transforms instead of waiting
until afterwards so that we can determine the correct security label.
Reported-by: Janak Desai <Janak.Desai@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Paul Moore <pmoore@xxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
security/selinux/hooks.c | 43 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------
1 file changed, 36 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
--- a/security/selinux/hooks.c
+++ b/security/selinux/hooks.c
@@ -4742,22 +4742,32 @@ static unsigned int selinux_ip_postroute
* as fast and as clean as possible. */
if (!selinux_policycap_netpeer)
return selinux_ip_postroute_compat(skb, ifindex, family);
+
+ secmark_active = selinux_secmark_enabled();
+ peerlbl_active = netlbl_enabled() || selinux_xfrm_enabled();
+ if (!secmark_active && !peerlbl_active)
+ return NF_ACCEPT;
+
+ sk = skb->sk;
+
#ifdef CONFIG_XFRM
/* If skb->dst->xfrm is non-NULL then the packet is undergoing an IPsec
* packet transformation so allow the packet to pass without any checks
* since we'll have another chance to perform access control checks
* when the packet is on it's final way out.
* NOTE: there appear to be some IPv6 multicast cases where skb->dst
- * is NULL, in this case go ahead and apply access control. */
- if (skb_dst(skb) != NULL && skb_dst(skb)->xfrm != NULL)
+ * is NULL, in this case go ahead and apply access control.
+ * is NULL, in this case go ahead and apply access control.
+ * NOTE: if this is a local socket (skb->sk != NULL) that is in the
+ * TCP listening state we cannot wait until the XFRM processing
+ * is done as we will miss out on the SA label if we do;
+ * unfortunately, this means more work, but it is only once per
+ * connection. */
+ if (skb_dst(skb) != NULL && skb_dst(skb)->xfrm != NULL &&
+ !(sk != NULL && sk->sk_state == TCP_LISTEN))
return NF_ACCEPT;
#endif
- secmark_active = selinux_secmark_enabled();
- peerlbl_active = netlbl_enabled() || selinux_xfrm_enabled();
- if (!secmark_active && !peerlbl_active)
- return NF_ACCEPT;
- sk = skb->sk;
if (sk == NULL) {
/* Without an associated socket the packet is either coming
* from the kernel or it is being forwarded; check the packet
@@ -4785,6 +4795,25 @@ static unsigned int selinux_ip_postroute
struct sk_security_struct *sksec = sk->sk_security;
if (selinux_skb_peerlbl_sid(skb, family, &skb_sid))
return NF_DROP;
+ /* At this point, if the returned skb peerlbl is SECSID_NULL
+ * and the packet has been through at least one XFRM
+ * transformation then we must be dealing with the "final"
+ * form of labeled IPsec packet; since we've already applied
+ * all of our access controls on this packet we can safely
+ * pass the packet. */
+ if (skb_sid == SECSID_NULL) {
+ switch (family) {
+ case PF_INET:
+ if (IPCB(skb)->flags & IPSKB_XFRM_TRANSFORMED)
+ return NF_ACCEPT;
+ break;
+ case PF_INET6:
+ if (IP6CB(skb)->flags & IP6SKB_XFRM_TRANSFORMED)
+ return NF_ACCEPT;
+ default:
+ return NF_DROP_ERR(-ECONNREFUSED);
+ }
+ }
if (selinux_conn_sid(sksec->sid, skb_sid, &peer_sid))
return NF_DROP;
secmark_perm = PACKET__SEND;
Patches currently in stable-queue which might be from pmoore@xxxxxxxxxx are
queue-3.10/selinux-process-labeled-ipsec-tcp-syn-ack-packets-properly-in-selinux_ip_postroute.patch
queue-3.10/selinux-selinux_setprocattr-ptrace_parent-needs-rcu_read_lock.patch
queue-3.10/selinux-look-for-ipsec-labels-on-both-inbound-and-outbound-packets.patch
queue-3.10/selinux-fix-broken-peer-recv-check.patch
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe stable" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html