linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] tuntap: fix ambigious multiqueue API

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]

Message-ID: <1537306.clOAp6XvaO@sifl>
Date:	Fri, 14 Dec 2012 16:21:33 -0500
From:	Paul Moore <pmoore@...hat.com>
To:	Jason Wang <jasowang@...hat.com>
Cc:	mst@...hat.com, davem@...emloft.net, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, mprivozn@...hat.com,
	wkevils@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] tuntap: fix ambigious multiqueue API

On Friday, December 14, 2012 05:53:30 PM Jason Wang wrote:
> The current multiqueue API is ambigious which may confuse both user and LSM
> to do things correctly:
> 
> - Both TUNSETIFF and TUNSETQUEUE could be used to create the queues of a
> tuntap device.
> - TUNSETQUEUE were used to disable and enable a specific queue of the
>   device. But since the state of tuntap were completely removed from the
> queue, it could be used to attach to another device (there's no such kind
> of requirement currently, and it needs new kind of LSM policy.
> - TUNSETQUEUE could be used to attach to a persistent device without any
>   queues. This kind of attching bypass the necessary checking during
> TUNSETIFF and may lead unexpected result.
> 
> So this patch tries to make a cleaner and simpler API by:
> 
> - Only allow TUNSETIFF to create queues.
> - TUNSETQUEUE could be only used to disable and enabled the queues of a
> device, and the state of the tuntap device were not detachd from the queues
> when it was disabled, so TUNSETQUEUE could be only used after TUNSETIFF and
> with the same device.
> 
> This is done by introducing a list which keeps track of all queues which
> were disabled. The queue would be moved between this list and tfiles[]
> array when it was enabled/disabled. A pointer of the tun_struct were also
> introdued to track the device it belongs to when it was disabled.
> 
> After the change, the isolation between management and application could be
> done through: TUNSETIFF were only called by management software and
> TUNSETQUEUE were only called by application.For LSM/SELinux, the things
> left is to do proper check during tun_set_queue() if needed.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Jason Wang <jasowang@...hat.com>

Let me digest these changes and I'll respin the LSM/SELinux multiqueue fixes 
and send them back out for re-discussion/review.

-- 
paul moore
security and virtualization @ redhat

--
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/