From: Topi Miettinen <toiwoton@gmail.com>
To: russell@coker.com.au
Cc: selinux-refpolicy@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Access to raw memory: remove or make boolean?
Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2020 10:54:33 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <769ff926-5cce-a14b-0579-6b81a436c5a9@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <2012273.jey3ENlaR0@xev>
On 25.2.2020 2.27, Russell Coker wrote:
> On Tuesday, 25 February 2020 2:56:01 AM AEDT Topi Miettinen wrote:
>> The PR would make all these conditional to new boolean,
>> allow_raw_memory_access.
>
> So if someone needs one of those many accesses (klogd_t or hald_t seems
> likely) then they also get access for things that aren't needed on most
> systems nowadays (EG xserver_t) and things that never made any sense (such as
> colord_t).
>
> I think it would be best to remove most of those /dev/mem access rules and add
> them back only after testing with recent software and comments about why they
> are needed.
>
>>> A quick grep of the latest policy turned up the above access to /dev/mem.
>>> Do ddcprobe_t, vbetool_t, and the X server still do that? mcelog_t, and
>>> klogd_t might have good uses, as might sosreport_t (don't even know what
>>> it does but guessing it's like klogd_t). rpm_t should maybe transition
>>> to a different domain for whatever it was doing and the same for kudzo_t.
>>> Vmware is a bit ugly, so vmware_t might actually do that. iscsi_t,
>>> mdadm_t, colord_t, and initrc_t should never have needed that. hald_t,
>>> hald_mac_t and
>>> devicekit_disk_t might have needed it, but hopefully that was fixed a long
>>> time ago.
>>>
>>> Interestingly bootloader_t doesn't have such access even though a quick
>>> inspection of the LILO source code shows that it still probes the boot
>>> order by directly reading the BIOS memory. I guess no-one uses LILO with
>>> SE Linux.
>> I also don't know most of these programs. Direct memory access was
>> probably needed for X server during SVGA times, at least NVIDIA driver
>> on my system does not seem to need it.
>
> I think it was needed before KMS. Is it even possible to run without KMS
> nowadays?
No idea. I'll update the PR so that only ddcprobe_t, vbetool_t,
mcelog_t, klogd_t, sosreport_t and vmware_t keep the access (subject to
boolean) and for others it's just removed unconditionally.
-Topi
prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-02-25 8:54 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-02-24 15:11 Access to raw memory: remove or make boolean? Topi Miettinen
2020-02-24 15:42 ` Russell Coker
2020-02-24 15:56 ` Topi Miettinen
2020-02-25 0:27 ` Russell Coker
2020-02-25 8:54 ` Topi Miettinen [this message]
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=769ff926-5cce-a14b-0579-6b81a436c5a9@gmail.com \
--to=toiwoton@gmail.com \
--cc=russell@coker.com.au \
--cc=selinux-refpolicy@vger.kernel.org \
/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).