From: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
To: Paul Moore <paul@paul-moore.com>, Ondrej Mosnacek <omosnace@redhat.com>
Cc: linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org,
James Morris <jmorris@namei.org>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
Stephen Smalley <stephen.smalley.work@gmail.com>,
selinux@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org,
linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, bpf@vger.kernel.org,
netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Casey Schaufler <casey@schaufler-ca.com>,
jolsa@redhat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] lockdown,selinux: avoid bogus SELinux lockdown permission checks
Date: Fri, 28 May 2021 09:09:57 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <01135120-8bf7-df2e-cff0-1d73f1f841c3@iogearbox.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAHC9VhTasra0tU=bKwVqAwLRYaC+hYakirRz0Mn5jbVMuDkwrA@mail.gmail.com>
On 5/28/21 3:37 AM, Paul Moore wrote:
> On Mon, May 17, 2021 at 5:22 AM Ondrej Mosnacek <omosnace@redhat.com> wrote:
>>
>> Commit 59438b46471a ("security,lockdown,selinux: implement SELinux
>> lockdown") added an implementation of the locked_down LSM hook to
>> SELinux, with the aim to restrict which domains are allowed to perform
>> operations that would breach lockdown.
>>
>> However, in several places the security_locked_down() hook is called in
>> situations where the current task isn't doing any action that would
>> directly breach lockdown, leading to SELinux checks that are basically
>> bogus.
>>
>> Since in most of these situations converting the callers such that
>> security_locked_down() is called in a context where the current task
>> would be meaningful for SELinux is impossible or very non-trivial (and
>> could lead to TOCTOU issues for the classic Lockdown LSM
>> implementation), fix this by modifying the hook to accept a struct cred
>> pointer as argument, where NULL will be interpreted as a request for a
>> "global", task-independent lockdown decision only. Then modify SELinux
>> to ignore calls with cred == NULL.
>
> I'm not overly excited about skipping the access check when cred is
> NULL. Based on the description and the little bit that I've dug into
> thus far it looks like using SECINITSID_KERNEL as the subject would be
> much more appropriate. *Something* (the kernel in most of the
> relevant cases it looks like) is requesting that a potentially
> sensitive disclosure be made, and ignoring it seems like the wrong
> thing to do. Leaving the access control intact also provides a nice
> avenue to audit these requests should users want to do that.
I think the rationale/workaround for ignoring calls with cred == NULL (or the previous
patch with the unimplemented hook) from Ondrej was two-fold, at least speaking for his
seen tracing cases:
i) The audit events that are triggered due to calls to security_locked_down()
can OOM kill a machine, see below details [0].
ii) It seems to be causing a deadlock via slow_avc_audit() -> audit_log_end()
when presumingly trying to wake up kauditd [1].
How would your suggestion above solve both i) and ii)?
[0] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1955585 :
I starting seeing this with F-34. When I run a container that is traced with eBPF
to record the syscalls it is doing, auditd is flooded with messages like:
type=AVC msg=audit(1619784520.593:282387): avc: denied { confidentiality } for
pid=476 comm="auditd" lockdown_reason="use of bpf to read kernel RAM"
scontext=system_u:system_r:auditd_t:s0 tcontext=system_u:system_r:auditd_t:s0 tclass=lockdown permissive=0
This seems to be leading to auditd running out of space in the backlog buffer and
eventually OOMs the machine.
auditd running at 99% CPU presumably processing all the messages, eventually I get:
Apr 30 12:20:42 fedora kernel: audit: backlog limit exceeded
Apr 30 12:20:42 fedora kernel: audit: backlog limit exceeded
Apr 30 12:20:42 fedora kernel: audit: audit_backlog=2152579 > audit_backlog_limit=64
Apr 30 12:20:42 fedora kernel: audit: audit_backlog=2152626 > audit_backlog_limit=64
Apr 30 12:20:42 fedora kernel: audit: audit_backlog=2152694 > audit_backlog_limit=64
Apr 30 12:20:42 fedora kernel: audit: audit_lost=6878426 audit_rate_limit=0 audit_backlog_limit=64
Apr 30 12:20:45 fedora kernel: oci-seccomp-bpf invoked oom-killer: gfp_mask=0x100cca(GFP_HIGHUSER_MOVABLE), order=0, oom_score_adj=-1000
Apr 30 12:20:45 fedora kernel: CPU: 0 PID: 13284 Comm: oci-seccomp-bpf Not tainted 5.11.12-300.fc34.x86_64 #1
Apr 30 12:20:45 fedora kernel: Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (i440FX + PIIX, 1996), BIOS 1.13.0-2.fc32 04/01/2014
[1] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-audit/CANYvDQN7H5tVp47fbYcRasv4XF07eUbsDwT_eDCHXJUj43J7jQ@mail.gmail.com/ :
Upstream kernel 5.11.0-rc7 and later was found to deadlock during a bpf_probe_read_compat()
call within a sched_switch tracepoint. The problem is reproducible with the reg_alloc3
testcase from SystemTap's BPF backend testsuite on x86_64 as well as the runqlat,runqslower
tools from bcc on ppc64le. Example stack trace from [1]:
[ 730.868702] stack backtrace:
[ 730.869590] CPU: 1 PID: 701 Comm: in:imjournal Not tainted, 5.12.0-0.rc2.20210309git144c79ef3353.166.fc35.x86_64 #1
[ 730.871605] Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (Q35 + ICH9, 2009), BIOS 1.13.0-2.fc32 04/01/2014
[ 730.873278] Call Trace:
[ 730.873770] dump_stack+0x7f/0xa1
[ 730.874433] check_noncircular+0xdf/0x100
[ 730.875232] __lock_acquire+0x1202/0x1e10
[ 730.876031] ? __lock_acquire+0xfc0/0x1e10
[ 730.876844] lock_acquire+0xc2/0x3a0
[ 730.877551] ? __wake_up_common_lock+0x52/0x90
[ 730.878434] ? lock_acquire+0xc2/0x3a0
[ 730.879186] ? lock_is_held_type+0xa7/0x120
[ 730.880044] ? skb_queue_tail+0x1b/0x50
[ 730.880800] _raw_spin_lock_irqsave+0x4d/0x90
[ 730.881656] ? __wake_up_common_lock+0x52/0x90
[ 730.882532] __wake_up_common_lock+0x52/0x90
[ 730.883375] audit_log_end+0x5b/0x100
[ 730.884104] slow_avc_audit+0x69/0x90
[ 730.884836] avc_has_perm+0x8b/0xb0
[ 730.885532] selinux_lockdown+0xa5/0xd0
[ 730.886297] security_locked_down+0x20/0x40
[ 730.887133] bpf_probe_read_compat+0x66/0xd0
[ 730.887983] bpf_prog_250599c5469ac7b5+0x10f/0x820
[ 730.888917] trace_call_bpf+0xe9/0x240
[ 730.889672] perf_trace_run_bpf_submit+0x4d/0xc0
[ 730.890579] perf_trace_sched_switch+0x142/0x180
[ 730.891485] ? __schedule+0x6d8/0xb20
[ 730.892209] __schedule+0x6d8/0xb20
[ 730.892899] schedule+0x5b/0xc0
[ 730.893522] exit_to_user_mode_prepare+0x11d/0x240
[ 730.894457] syscall_exit_to_user_mode+0x27/0x70
[ 730.895361] entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x44/0xae
>> Since most callers will just want to pass current_cred() as the cred
>> parameter, rename the hook to security_cred_locked_down() and provide
>> the original security_locked_down() function as a simple wrapper around
>> the new hook.
[...]
>
>> 3. kernel/trace/bpf_trace.c:bpf_probe_read_kernel{,_str}_common()
>> Called when a BPF program calls a helper that could leak kernel
>> memory. The task context is not relevant here, since the program
>> may very well be run in the context of a different task than the
>> consumer of the data.
>> See: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1955585
>
> The access control check isn't so much who is consuming the data, but
> who is requesting a potential violation of a "lockdown", yes? For
> example, the SELinux policy rule for the current lockdown check looks
> something like this:
>
> allow <who> <who> : lockdown { <reason> };
>
> It seems to me that the task context is relevant here and performing
> the access control check based on the task's domain is correct.
This doesn't make much sense to me, it's /not/ the task 'requesting a potential
violation of a "lockdown"', but rather the running tracing program which is e.g.
inspecting kernel data structures around the triggered event. If I understood
you correctly, having an 'allow' check on, say, httpd would be rather odd since
things like perf/bcc/bpftrace/systemtap/etc is installing the tracing probe instead.
Meaning, if we would /not/ trace such events (like in the prior mentioned syscall
example), then there is also no call to the security_locked_down() from that same/
unmodified application.
Thanks,
Daniel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-05-28 7:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 37+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-05-17 9:20 [PATCH v2] lockdown,selinux: avoid bogus SELinux lockdown permission checks Ondrej Mosnacek
2021-05-17 11:00 ` Michael Ellerman
2021-05-26 11:44 ` Ondrej Mosnacek
2021-05-27 4:28 ` James Morris
2021-05-27 14:18 ` Paul Moore
2021-05-28 1:37 ` Paul Moore
2021-05-28 7:09 ` Daniel Borkmann [this message]
2021-05-28 9:53 ` Jiri Olsa
2021-05-28 9:56 ` Daniel Borkmann
2021-05-28 10:16 ` Jiri Olsa
2021-05-28 11:47 ` Jiri Olsa
2021-05-28 11:54 ` Daniel Borkmann
2021-05-28 13:42 ` Ondrej Mosnacek
2021-05-28 14:20 ` Daniel Borkmann
2021-05-28 15:54 ` Paul Moore
2021-05-28 15:47 ` Paul Moore
2021-05-28 18:10 ` Daniel Borkmann
2021-05-28 22:52 ` Paul Moore
2021-05-29 18:48 ` Paul Moore
2021-05-31 8:24 ` Daniel Borkmann
2021-06-01 20:47 ` Paul Moore
2021-06-02 12:40 ` Daniel Borkmann
2021-06-02 15:13 ` Paul Moore
2021-06-03 18:52 ` Daniel Borkmann
2021-06-04 4:50 ` Paul Moore
2021-06-04 18:02 ` Daniel Borkmann
2021-06-04 23:34 ` Paul Moore
2021-06-05 0:08 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2021-06-05 18:10 ` Casey Schaufler
2021-06-05 18:17 ` Linus Torvalds
2021-06-06 2:11 ` Paul Moore
2021-06-06 1:30 ` Paul Moore
2021-06-02 13:39 ` Ondrej Mosnacek
2021-06-03 17:46 ` Paul Moore
2021-06-08 11:01 ` Ondrej Mosnacek
2021-06-09 2:40 ` Paul Moore
2021-05-28 13:58 ` Steven Rostedt
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=01135120-8bf7-df2e-cff0-1d73f1f841c3@iogearbox.net \
--to=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=casey@schaufler-ca.com \
--cc=jmorris@namei.org \
--cc=jolsa@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=omosnace@redhat.com \
--cc=paul@paul-moore.com \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=selinux@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=stephen.smalley.work@gmail.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).