| 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
| ||
|
Date: Wed, 4 Mar 2009 11:47:32 -0500
From: Paul Moore <paul.moore@...com>
To: etienne <etienne.basset@...ericable.fr>
Cc: LSM <linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Casey Schaufler <casey@...aufler-ca.com>
Subject: Re: [patch][smack][2.6.29-rc] fixes for unlabeled host support
On Wednesday 04 March 2009 01:33:51 am etienne wrote:
> Hello,
>
> The following patch (against 2.6.29rc5) fixes a few issues in the
> smack/netlabel "unlabeled host support" functionnality that was added in
> 2.6.29rc. It should go in before -final.
>
>
> 1) smack_host_label disregard a "0.0.0.0/0 @" rule (or other label),
> preventing 'tagged' tasks to access Internet (many systems drop packets
> with IP options) 2) netmasks were not handled correctly, they were stored
> in a way _not equivalent_ to conversion to be32 (it was equivalent for /0,
> /8, /16, /24, /32 masks but not other masks) 3) smack_netlbladdr prefixes
> (IP/mask) were not consistent (mask&IP was not done), so there could have
> been different list entries for the same IP prefix; if those entries had
> different labels, well ... 4) they were not sorted
>
> 1) 2) 3) are bugs, 4) is a more cosmetic issue.
> The patch :
> -creates a new helper smk_netlbladdr_insert to insert a smk_netlbladdr,
> sorted by netmask length -use the new sorted nature of smack_netlbladdrs
> list to simplify smack_host_label : the first match _will_ be the more
> specific
> -corrects endianness issues in smk_write_netlbladdr & netlbladdr_seq_show
>
>
> regards,
> Etienne Basset
>
> Signed-off-by: <etienne.basset@...ericable.fr>
Reviewed-by: Paul Moore <paul.moore@...com>
> security/smack/smack_lsm.c | 43 +++++------------------------
> security/smack/smackfs.c | 64
> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---------- 2 files changed, 57
> insertions(+), 50 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/security/smack/smack_lsm.c b/security/smack/smack_lsm.c
> index 0278bc0..e7ded13 100644
> --- a/security/smack/smack_lsm.c
> +++ b/security/smack/smack_lsm.c
> @@ -1498,58 +1498,31 @@ static int smack_socket_post_create(struct socket
> *sock, int family, * looks for host based access restrictions
> *
> * This version will only be appropriate for really small
> - * sets of single label hosts. Because of the masking
> - * it cannot shortcut out on the first match. There are
> - * numerious ways to address the problem, but none of them
> - * have been applied here.
> + * sets of single label hosts.
> *
> * Returns the label of the far end or NULL if it's not special.
> */
> static char *smack_host_label(struct sockaddr_in *sip)
> {
> struct smk_netlbladdr *snp;
> - char *bestlabel = NULL;
> struct in_addr *siap = &sip->sin_addr;
> - struct in_addr *liap;
> - struct in_addr *miap;
> - struct in_addr bestmask;
>
> if (siap->s_addr == 0)
> return NULL;
>
> - bestmask.s_addr = 0;
> -
> for (snp = smack_netlbladdrs; snp != NULL; snp = snp->smk_next) {
> - liap = &snp->smk_host.sin_addr;
> - miap = &snp->smk_mask;
> - /*
> - * If the addresses match after applying the list entry mask
> - * the entry matches the address. If it doesn't move along to
> - * the next entry.
> - */
> - if ((liap->s_addr & miap->s_addr) !=
> - (siap->s_addr & miap->s_addr))
> - continue;
> /*
> - * If the list entry mask identifies a single address
> - * it can't get any more specific.
> + * we break after finding the first match because
> + * the list is sorted from longest to shortest mask
> + * so we have found the most specific match
> */
> - if (miap->s_addr == 0xffffffff)
> + if ((&snp->smk_host.sin_addr)->s_addr ==
> + (siap->s_addr & (&snp->smk_mask)->s_addr)) {
> return snp->smk_label;
> - /*
> - * If the list entry mask is less specific than the best
> - * already found this entry is uninteresting.
> - */
> - if ((miap->s_addr | bestmask.s_addr) == bestmask.s_addr)
> - continue;
> - /*
> - * This is better than any entry found so far.
> - */
> - bestmask.s_addr = miap->s_addr;
> - bestlabel = snp->smk_label;
> + }
> }
>
> - return bestlabel;
> + return NULL;
> }
>
> /**
> diff --git a/security/smack/smackfs.c b/security/smack/smackfs.c
> index 8e42800..51f0efc 100644
> --- a/security/smack/smackfs.c
> +++ b/security/smack/smackfs.c
> @@ -650,10 +650,6 @@ static void *netlbladdr_seq_next(struct seq_file *s,
> void *v, loff_t *pos)
>
> return skp;
> }
> -/*
> -#define BEMASK 0x80000000
> -*/
> -#define BEMASK 0x00000001
> #define BEBITS (sizeof(__be32) * 8)
>
> /*
> @@ -663,12 +659,10 @@ static int netlbladdr_seq_show(struct seq_file *s,
> void *v) {
> struct smk_netlbladdr *skp = (struct smk_netlbladdr *) v;
> unsigned char *hp = (char *) &skp->smk_host.sin_addr.s_addr;
> - __be32 bebits;
> - int maskn = 0;
> + int maskn;
> + u32 temp_mask = be32_to_cpu(skp->smk_mask.s_addr);
>
> - for (bebits = BEMASK; bebits != 0; maskn++, bebits <<= 1)
> - if ((skp->smk_mask.s_addr & bebits) == 0)
> - break;
> + for (maskn = 0; temp_mask; temp_mask <<= 1, maskn++);
>
> seq_printf(s, "%u.%u.%u.%u/%d %s\n",
> hp[0], hp[1], hp[2], hp[3], maskn, skp->smk_label);
> @@ -702,6 +696,42 @@ static int smk_open_netlbladdr(struct inode *inode,
> struct file *file) }
>
> /**
> + * smk_netlbladdr_insert
> + * @new : netlabel to insert
> + *
> + * This helper insert netlabel in the smack_netlbladdrs list
> + * sorted by netmask length (longest to smallest)
> + */
> +static void smk_netlbladdr_insert(struct smk_netlbladdr *new)
> +{
> + struct smk_netlbladdr *m;
> +
> + if (smack_netlbladdrs == NULL) {
> + smack_netlbladdrs = new;
> + return;
> + }
> +
> + /* the comparison '>' is a bit hacky, but works */
> + if (new->smk_mask.s_addr > smack_netlbladdrs->smk_mask.s_addr) {
> + new->smk_next = smack_netlbladdrs;
> + smack_netlbladdrs = new;
> + return;
> + }
> + for (m = smack_netlbladdrs; m != NULL; m = m->smk_next) {
> + if (m->smk_next == NULL) {
> + m->smk_next = new;
> + return;
> + }
> + if (new->smk_mask.s_addr > m->smk_next->smk_mask.s_addr) {
> + new->smk_next = m->smk_next;
> + m->smk_next = new;
> + return;
> + }
> + }
> +}
> +
> +
> +/**
> * smk_write_netlbladdr - write() for /smack/netlabel
> * @filp: file pointer, not actually used
> * @buf: where to get the data from
> @@ -724,8 +754,9 @@ static ssize_t smk_write_netlbladdr(struct file *file,
> const char __user *buf, struct netlbl_audit audit_info;
> struct in_addr mask;
> unsigned int m;
> - __be32 bebits = BEMASK;
> + u32 mask_bits = (1<<31);
> __be32 nsa;
> + u32 temp_mask;
>
> /*
> * Must have privilege.
> @@ -761,10 +792,13 @@ static ssize_t smk_write_netlbladdr(struct file
> *file, const char __user *buf, if (sp == NULL)
> return -EINVAL;
>
> - for (mask.s_addr = 0; m > 0; m--) {
> - mask.s_addr |= bebits;
> - bebits <<= 1;
> + for (temp_mask = 0; m > 0; m--) {
> + temp_mask |= mask_bits;
> + mask_bits >>= 1;
> }
> + mask.s_addr = cpu_to_be32(temp_mask);
> +
> + newname.sin_addr.s_addr &= mask.s_addr;
> /*
> * Only allow one writer at a time. Writes should be
> * quite rare and small in any case.
> @@ -772,6 +806,7 @@ static ssize_t smk_write_netlbladdr(struct file *file,
> const char __user *buf, mutex_lock(&smk_netlbladdr_lock);
>
> nsa = newname.sin_addr.s_addr;
> + /* try to find if the prefix is already in the list */
> for (skp = smack_netlbladdrs; skp != NULL; skp = skp->smk_next)
> if (skp->smk_host.sin_addr.s_addr == nsa &&
> skp->smk_mask.s_addr == mask.s_addr)
> @@ -787,9 +822,8 @@ static ssize_t smk_write_netlbladdr(struct file *file,
> const char __user *buf, rc = 0;
> skp->smk_host.sin_addr.s_addr = newname.sin_addr.s_addr;
> skp->smk_mask.s_addr = mask.s_addr;
> - skp->smk_next = smack_netlbladdrs;
> skp->smk_label = sp;
> - smack_netlbladdrs = skp;
> + smk_netlbladdr_insert(skp);
> }
> } else {
> rc = netlbl_cfg_unlbl_static_del(&init_net, NULL,
--
paul moore
linux @ hp
--
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