[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <538684.41302.qm@web36603.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Date: Fri, 30 May 2008 16:10:37 -0700 (PDT)
From: Casey Schaufler <casey@...aufler-ca.com>
To: "Ahmed S. Darwish" <darwish.07@...il.com>,
Casey Schaufler <casey@...aufler-ca.com>,
Paul Moore <paul.moore@...com>
Cc: linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH BUGFIX -rc4] Smack: Respect 'unlabeled' netlabel mode
--- "Ahmed S. Darwish" <darwish.07@...il.com> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> In case of Smack 'unlabeled' netlabel option, Smack passes a _zero_
> initialized 'secattr' to label a packet/sock. This causes an
> [unfound domain label error]/-ENOENT by netlbl_sock_setattr().
> Above Netlabel failure leads to Smack socket hooks failure causing
> an always-on socket() -EPERM error.
>
> Such packets should have a netlabel domain agreed with netlabel to
> represent unlabeled packets. Fortunately Smack net ambient label
> packets are agreed with netlabel to be treated as unlabeled packets.
>
> Treat all packets coming out from a 'unlabeled' Smack system as
> coming from the smack net ambient label.
To date the behavior of a Smack system running with nltype
unlabeled has been carefully undefined. The way you're defining
it will result in a system in which only processes running with
the ambient label will be able to use sockets, unless I'm reading
the code incorrectly. This seems like "correct" behavior, but
I don't think it is what those who've tried it would expect.
Casey Schaufler
casey@...aufler-ca.com
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists