From: Paul Moore <paul@paul-moore.com>
To: Ondrej Mosnacek <omosnace@redhat.com>
Cc: selinux@vger.kernel.org, linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org,
linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Lokesh Gidra <lokeshgidra@google.com>,
Stephen Smalley <stephen.smalley.work@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/2] selinux,anon_inodes: Use a separate SELinux class for each type of anon inode
Date: Wed, 21 Apr 2021 16:38:20 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAHC9VhTFPHO7YtTxSZNcEZwoy4R3RXVu-4RrAHRtv8BVEw-zGA@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210421171446.785507-1-omosnace@redhat.com>
On Wed, Apr 21, 2021 at 1:14 PM Ondrej Mosnacek <omosnace@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> This series aims to correct a design flaw in the original anon_inode
> SELinux support that would make it hard to write policies for anonymous
> inodes once more types of them are supported (currently only userfaultfd
> inodes are). A more detailed rationale is provided in the second patch.
>
> The first patch extends the anon_inode_getfd_secure() function to accept
> an additional numeric identifier that represents the type of the
> anonymous inode being created, which is passed to the LSMs via
> security_inode_init_security_anon().
>
> The second patch then introduces a new SELinux policy capability that
> allow policies to opt-in to have a separate class used for each type of
> anon inode. That means that the "old way" will still
... will what? :)
I think it would be a very good idea if you could provide some
concrete examples of actual policy problems encountered using the
current approach. I haven't looked at these patches very seriously
yet, but my initial reaction is not "oh yes, we definitely need this".
> I wish I had realized the practical consequences earlier, while the
> patches were still under review, but it only started to sink in after
> the authors themselves later raised the issue in an off-list
> conversation. Even then, I still hoped it wouldn't be that bad, but the
> more I thought about how to apply this in an actual policy, the more I
> realized how much pain it would be to work with the current design, so
> I decided to propose these changes.
>
> I hope this will be an acceptable solution.
>
> A selinux-testsuite patch that adapts the userfaultfd test to work also
> with the new policy capability enabled will follow.
>
> Ondrej Mosnacek (2):
> LSM,anon_inodes: explicitly distinguish anon inode types
> selinux: add capability to map anon inode types to separate classes
>
> fs/anon_inodes.c | 42 +++++++++++++---------
> fs/userfaultfd.c | 6 ++--
> include/linux/anon_inodes.h | 4 ++-
> include/linux/lsm_hook_defs.h | 3 +-
> include/linux/security.h | 19 ++++++++++
> security/security.c | 3 +-
> security/selinux/hooks.c | 28 ++++++++++++++-
> security/selinux/include/classmap.h | 2 ++
> security/selinux/include/policycap.h | 1 +
> security/selinux/include/policycap_names.h | 3 +-
> security/selinux/include/security.h | 7 ++++
> 11 files changed, 95 insertions(+), 23 deletions(-)
>
> --
> 2.30.2
--
paul moore
www.paul-moore.com
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-04-21 20:38 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-04-21 17:14 [RFC PATCH 0/2] selinux,anon_inodes: Use a separate SELinux class for each type of anon inode Ondrej Mosnacek
2021-04-21 17:14 ` [RFC PATCH 1/2] LSM,anon_inodes: explicitly distinguish anon inode types Ondrej Mosnacek
2021-04-21 17:14 ` [RFC PATCH 2/2] selinux: add capability to map anon inode types to separate classes Ondrej Mosnacek
2021-04-22 13:21 ` Stephen Smalley
2021-04-23 13:41 ` Ondrej Mosnacek
2021-04-23 14:22 ` Stephen Smalley
2021-04-23 15:20 ` Stephen Smalley
2021-04-26 16:00 ` Ondrej Mosnacek
2021-04-21 20:38 ` Paul Moore [this message]
2021-04-22 11:39 ` [RFC PATCH 0/2] selinux,anon_inodes: Use a separate SELinux class for each type of anon inode Ondrej Mosnacek
2021-04-22 13:48 ` Paul Moore
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=CAHC9VhTFPHO7YtTxSZNcEZwoy4R3RXVu-4RrAHRtv8BVEw-zGA@mail.gmail.com \
--to=paul@paul-moore.com \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lokeshgidra@google.com \
--cc=omosnace@redhat.com \
--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).