netdev - Re: [PATCH 1/2] Define security_sk

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Wed, 31 Aug 2011 13:49:57 -0700
From:	Casey Schaufler <casey@...aufler-ca.com>
To:	Stephen Smalley <sds@...ho.nsa.gov>
CC:	rongqing.li@...driver.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	selinux@...ho.nsa.gov, linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org,
	Casey Schaufler <casey@...aufler-ca.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] Define security_sk_getsecctx

On 8/31/2011 11:46 AM, Stephen Smalley wrote:
> On Wed, 2011-08-31 at 08:43 -0700, Casey Schaufler wrote:
>> On 8/31/2011 1:36 AM, rongqing.li@...driver.com wrote:
>>> From: Roy.Li <rongqing.li@...driver.com>
>>>
>>> Define security_sk_getsecctx to return the security
>>> context of a sock.
>> So, what is the intended use of the information
>> coming from this hook? If I wanted to write the
>> Smack hook, which of the "contexts" would I want
>> to return? There are potentially three. If I know
>> what the caller is looking for, I can (hopefully)
>> select the correct information.
> The initial use case is for netstat -Z so that it can reliably show the
> security context of the socket rather than inferring it from the owning
> process, which can be inaccurate for security-aware applications.
>
> In your situation, when in != out, which would you rather see in netstat
> -Z output?  Alternatively, if you want them both, perhaps you could
> combine in and out into a single string that is returned, similar to
> what you proposed for handling multiple xattrs with inode_getsecctx()?
>

If we want to use secctx consistently within the kernel, and
I personally think that is a good idea, I would have to chose
the SMACK64IPIN (label checked on packet delivery) value. Putting
both the SMACK64IPOUT and SMACK64IPIN "contexts" into the secctx
would violate the architectural notion that a secctx is the
textual representation of a value used to make access control
decisions. It would mean that calling security_secctx_to_secid()
with the value returned by security_sk_getsecctx would be invalid.
Note that this is different from the mechanism I had suggested
for handling secctx in the multiple LSM case, as the composed
string would map to a single secid which would in turn map back
to that same composed string. If, on the other hand, what netstat -Z
is out to show is all of the LSM base information about the socket
a compound string might make sense, it just would not be a
secctx, it would be an informational string of some other flavor.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html