From: Paul Moore <paul@paul-moore.com>
To: Jeffrey Vander Stoep <jeffv@google.com>
Cc: SElinux list <selinux@vger.kernel.org>,
Stephen Smalley <sds@tycho.nsa.gov>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] selinux: map RTM_GETLINK to a privileged permission
Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2020 10:19:00 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <16fb415d3d8.27e8.85c95baa4474aabc7814e68940a78392@paul-moore.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CABXk95B77UXxhiG3=xRmJmG5c7knoF2pbdpweskreftggZzkUQ@mail.gmail.com>
On January 17, 2020 3:21:10 AM Jeffrey Vander Stoep <jeffv@google.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 17, 2020 at 1:32 AM Paul Moore <paul@paul-moore.com> wrote:
>> Our current handling of netlink messages is rather crude, especially
>> when you consider the significance of the netlink messages and the
>> rather coarse granularity when compared to other SELinux object
>> classes. I believe some (most? all?) of this is due to the number of
>> netlink messages compared to the maximum number of permissions in an
>> object class. Back when xperms were added, one of the motivations for
>> making it a general solution was to potentially use them for netlink;
>> we obviously haven't made the change in the netlink controls, but I
>> think this might be the right time to do it.
> That's a very large change with some unanswered questions - like how to
> handle
> generic netlink. I will have time later this year to make that change.
>
> In the meantime, this change is small (ideal for backporting) and
> consistent with
> how we differentiate between levels of sensitivity on netlink_audit
> messages.
> Would you consider taking v3 of this change with your suggested adjustment
> to
> selinux_policycaps_init()?
Yes, it is a big change and there are some open questions, but both of the changes we are discussing here are exposed to userspace so there is a need to make sure we get this as right as possible the first time. I am not a fan of exposing a change to userspace knowing that we will be replacing it in the future.
If we need to update the netlink controls, and I think we do, let's do it properly and not one message at a time.
--
paul moore
www.paul-moore.com
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-01-17 15:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-01-16 14:26 [PATCH] selinux: map RTM_GETLINK to a privileged permission Jeff Vander Stoep
2020-01-16 16:20 ` Stephen Smalley
2020-01-17 0:32 ` Paul Moore
2020-01-17 8:27 ` Jeffrey Vander Stoep
2020-01-17 12:37 ` Dominick Grift
2020-01-17 14:04 ` Jeffrey Vander Stoep
[not found] ` <CABXk95B77UXxhiG3=xRmJmG5c7knoF2pbdpweskreftggZzkUQ@mail.gmail.com>
2020-01-17 15:19 ` Paul Moore [this message]
2020-01-20 9:54 ` Jeffrey Vander Stoep
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=16fb415d3d8.27e8.85c95baa4474aabc7814e68940a78392@paul-moore.com \
--to=paul@paul-moore.com \
--cc=jeffv@google.com \
--cc=sds@tycho.nsa.gov \
--cc=selinux@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).