linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] security/selinux: fix /proc/sys/ labeling

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Message-ID: <AANLkTi=wAXO0+gC=Cvh8EcJKOQW6-LSuO_tm2MsrtQQ6@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Tue, 1 Feb 2011 18:32:46 +0200
From:	Lucian Adrian Grijincu <lucian.grijincu@...il.com>
To:	Stephen Smalley <sds@...ho.nsa.gov>
Cc:	James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org>,
	Eric Paris <eparis@...isplace.org>,
	Nick Piggin <npiggin@...nel.dk>,
	"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] security/selinux: fix /proc/sys/ labeling

On Tue, Feb 1, 2011 at 5:59 PM, Stephen Smalley <sds@...ho.nsa.gov> wrote:
>> Just the earlier one. I added his sign-off because of this paragraph
>> in SubmittingPatches:
>> | The Signed-off-by: tag indicates that the signer was involved in the
>> | development of the patch, or that he/she was in the patch's delivery path.


So should I leave Eric's sign-off here?


>> Without we label all nodes in /proc/ through selinux_proc_get_sid.
>>
>> /proc/1/limits should not get it's sid from here, but from
>> security_task_to_inode -> selinux_task_to_inode.
>>
>> Without the check we send "/1/limits" to selinux_proc_get_sid, which
>> strips off "/1" leaving "/limits". This will be labeled with "proc_t"
>> IIRC.
>
> Are you sure?  Those inodes should be labeled by proc_pid_make_inode()
> -> security_task_to_inode() -> selinux_task_to_inode(), which will set
> the inode SID to match the associated task SID, and set the
> isec->initialized flag.  Then when inode_doinit_with_dentry gets called
> later, it should bail immediately due to isec->initialized already being
> set.



I'll post an updated patch without those checks. I tested and 'find
/proc | xargs ls -Z' said the same thing with and without those
checks.

I remember doing the same test yesterday and saw some differences, but
I must have compared the wrong files.

-- 
 .
..: Lucian
--
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/