From: John Stultz <john.stultz@linaro.org>
To: Stephen Smalley <sds@tycho.nsa.gov>, Paul Moore <paul@paul-moore.com>
Cc: Jeffrey Vander Stoep <jeffv@google.com>,
Android Kernel Team <kernel-team@android.com>,
Nick Kralevich <nnk@google.com>,
lkml <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Satish Patel <satish.patel@linaro.org>,
Rob Herring <rob.herring@linaro.org>
Subject: "selinux: support distinctions among all network address families" causing existing bluetooth sepolicies to not work properly with Android?
Date: Tue, 6 Jun 2017 17:45:24 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CALAqxLVyVoiusPdHYceubWnnw+DTzU55MMdtHxhA=2w4FqxC_A@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
Hey folks,
Recently I was working to validate/enable a new bluetooth HAL on HiKey
with Android, and after getting it working properly with a 4.9 based
kernel, I found that I was seeing failures trying to run with an
upstream (4.12-rc3 based) kernel.
It seemed a call to:
socket(AF_BLUETOOTH, SOCK_RAW, BTPROTO_HCI);
was suddenly failing, and running "setenforce 0" would allow it to
continue properly.
I chased the issue down to da69a5306ab9 ("selinux: support
distinctions among all network address families"). And work around it
with the following (whitespace corrupted, sorry) hack:
diff --git a/security/selinux/hooks.c b/security/selinux/hooks.c
index e67a526..42dfd0f 100644
--- a/security/selinux/hooks.c
+++ b/security/selinux/hooks.c
@@ -1379,8 +1379,8 @@ static inline u16
socket_type_to_security_class(int family, int type, int protoc
return SECCLASS_CAN_SOCKET;
case PF_TIPC:
return SECCLASS_TIPC_SOCKET;
- case PF_BLUETOOTH:
- return SECCLASS_BLUETOOTH_SOCKET;
+// case PF_BLUETOOTH:
+// return SECCLASS_BLUETOOTH_SOCKET;
case PF_IUCV:
return SECCLASS_IUCV_SOCKET;
case PF_RXRPC:
Obviously this isn't ideal. The commit message claims that " Backward
compatibility is provided by only enabling the finer-grained socket
classes if a new policy capability is set in the policy; older
policies will behave as before."
Which makes it seem like the older sepolicy should be fine with newer
kernels, but this doesn't seem to be the case here? Am I missing
something? Is Android doing something odd with their POLICYDB that is
causing the kernel to think the sepolicy is newer?
thanks
-john
next reply other threads:[~2017-06-07 0:45 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-06-07 0:45 John Stultz [this message]
2017-06-07 12:40 ` "selinux: support distinctions among all network address families" causing existing bluetooth sepolicies to not work properly with Android? Stephen Smalley
2017-06-07 14:44 ` Stephen Smalley
2017-06-07 19:40 ` John Stultz
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='CALAqxLVyVoiusPdHYceubWnnw+DTzU55MMdtHxhA=2w4FqxC_A@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=john.stultz@linaro.org \
--cc=jeffv@google.com \
--cc=kernel-team@android.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=nnk@google.com \
--cc=paul@paul-moore.com \
--cc=rob.herring@linaro.org \
--cc=satish.patel@linaro.org \
--cc=sds@tycho.nsa.gov \
/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).