From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: guido@trentalancia.com (Guido Trentalancia)
Date: Thu, 03 Mar 2011 15:36:42 +0100
Subject: [refpolicy] [patch 1/3] Implementation of system conf type
In-Reply-To: <4D6E5523.7040001@tresys.com>
References: <4D5E95C1.9080805@redhat.com>  <20110219095711.GA6270@siphos.be>
	<1298180267.3098.11.camel@tesla.lan>  <4D62875A.8060006@redhat.com>
	<1298319075.11119.3.camel@tesla.lan>  <4D63DA61.3050705@tresys.com>
	<1298391526.16004.8.camel@tesla.lan>  <4D6D4FBA.5040005@tresys.com>
	<1299012069.14035.36.camel@tesla.lan>  <4D6E5523.7040001@tresys.com>
Message-ID: <1299163002.19257.15.camel@tesla.lan>
To: refpolicy@oss.tresys.com
List-Id: refpolicy.oss.tresys.com

On Wed, 02/03/2011 at 09.33 -0500, Christopher J. PeBenito wrote:
> On 03/01/11 15:41, Guido Trentalancia wrote:
> > On Tue, 01/03/2011 at 14.57 -0500, Christopher J. PeBenito wrote:
> >> On 02/22/11 11:18, Guido Trentalancia wrote:
> >>> On Tue, 22/02/2011 at 10.46 -0500, Christopher J. PeBenito wrote:
> >>>> On 02/21/11 15:11, Guido Trentalancia wrote:
> >>>>> On Mon, 21/02/2011 at 10.40 -0500, Daniel J Walsh wrote:
> >>>>>> On 02/20/2011 12:37 AM, Guido Trentalancia wrote:
> >>>> I don't understand why system-config-firewall would need to write to
> >>>> etc_t, the iptables rules have their own labeling:
> >>>>
> >>>> /etc/sysconfig/ip6?tables.*     --
> >>>> gen_context(system_u:object_r:iptables_conf_t,s0)
> >>>> /etc/sysconfig/system-config-firewall.* --
> >>>> gen_context(system_u:object_r:iptables_conf_t,s0)
> >>>>
> >>>>> Yes, this is very important. But isn't etc_runtime_t what is needed here
> >>>>> then ?
> >>>>
> >>>> No, the purpose of that type is for generated files such as /.autofsck
> >>>> and /etc/motd.
> >>>
> >>> Well then I think we need to check a few labels:
> >>>
> >>> /etc/smartd\.conf.*     --      system_u:object_r:etc_runtime_t:s0
> >>> /etc/reader\.conf       --      system_u:object_r:etc_runtime_t:s0
> >>
> >> Right, these need to be reevaluated.
> > 
> > I suppose you are going to take care of that.
> 
> Dan/Miroslav, do you have any thoughts on this?  I think these lines and
> the below four lines should be removed.
> 
> >>> And there is also other stuff that is not automatically-generated (if
> >>> that is what you meant for "generated"):
> >>>
> >>> /etc/motd       --      system_u:object_r:etc_runtime_t:s0
> >>> /etc/issue      --      system_u:object_r:etc_runtime_t:s0
> >>> /etc/HOSTNAME   --      system_u:object_r:etc_runtime_t:s0
> >>> /etc/issue\.net --      system_u:object_r:etc_runtime_t:s0
> >>
> >> These can be generated out of init scripts.  For example, Fedora used to
> >> generate /etc/issue out of a init script.  It doesn't look like they do
> >> that anymore, so perhaps we should reconsider these too
> >>
> >>> All the above mentioned files are configuration files by all means. Not
> >>> that it's an urgent matter, but according to what you just said, then
> >>> etc_runtime_t is possibly misplaced there...
> > 
> > Yes, some distributions generate very generic banners with the name of
> > the distribution and the version. But they are just meant to be examples
> > (similarly to generic configuration files installed by default in /etc
> > by most packages).
> > 
> > They are static, so etc_t is what we need here.

I also take the opportunity to remind you of the issue with mtab lock
files that I had already mentioned a few days ago.

Basically, mount tries to create lock files named:

/etc/mtab~<pid>

where <pid> gets substituted with the process id of mount itself.

Unfortunately at the moment these files are currently falling back to
the etc_t label. It is very much desirable to have them labeled
etc_runtime_t to avoid problems (denials) with write operations.

Originally the name for those lock files was /etc/mtab~. To avoid race
conditions it was decided to append the <pid>. The source code is
designed so that the upper bound for the length of <pid> is 20.

Please note that contrary to what is stated in the source code for mount
(fstab.c) there is no dot between "/etc/mtab~" and "<pid>" (it's not
"/etc/mtab~.<pid>") !

Can somebody please take care of this ?

Regards,

Guido