linux-kernel - Re: [AppArmor 01/41] Pass struct vfsmount to the inode

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <200705242151.HAD83735.OOFEFMVJFWGQtHT@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp>
Date:	Thu, 24 May 2007 21:51:51 +0900
From:	Tetsuo Handa <penguin-fsdevel@...ove.SAKURA.ne.jp>
To:	jmorris@...ei.org, agruen@...e.de
Cc:	viro@....linux.org.uk, jjohansen@...e.de,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, chrisw@...s-sol.org, tonyj@...e.de
Subject: Re: [AppArmor 01/41] Pass struct vfsmount to the inode_create LSMhook

Hello.

I think bind mounts were discussed when shared subtree
( http://lwn.net/Articles/159092/ ) was introduced.

For systems that allow users mount their CD/DVDs freely,
bind mounts are used and labeling files is a convenient way
to deny accessing somebody else's files.

But systems that don't allow users mount their CD/DVDs freely,
bind mounts needn't to be used and using pathnames is a convenient way
to deny accessing somebody else's files.

Pathname based access control/auditing system
works if the system doesn't use bind mounts.

However, there are distributions (e.g. Debian Etch)
that always use bind mounts. In such distributions,
pathname based access control/auditing system doesn't work.

This is not the fault of distributions nor
pathname based access control/auditing system.
It is possible to solve by passing vfsmount to VFS and LSM functions.

SELinux users are having a lot of trouble because pathnames in audit logs
are not always complete.
AppArmor users are having a lot of trouble because pathnames which
a process requested are ambiguous when bind mounts are used.

Being able to report pathnames that a process requested is not surprising
when considering user friendliness.
I beleive passing vfsmount makes both users happy.

Thanks.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/