linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] selinux: Assign proper class to PF_UNIX/SOCK

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]

Date:   Wed, 21 Jun 2017 15:04:01 -0400
From:   Paul Moore <paul@...l-moore.com>
To:     Luis Ressel <aranea@...ah.de>
Cc:     Stephen Smalley <sds@...ho.nsa.gov>,
        James Morris <james.l.morris@...cle.com>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org, selinux@...ho.nsa.gov
Subject: Re: [PATCH] selinux: Assign proper class to PF_UNIX/SOCK_RAW sockets

On Wed, Jun 21, 2017 at 5:48 AM, Luis Ressel <aranea@...ah.de> wrote:
> On Tue, 20 Jun 2017 17:43:38 -0400
> Paul Moore <paul@...l-moore.com> wrote:
>
>> Considering where we are at with respect to the merge window, let's
>> shelve this for now and I'll merge it after the next merge window
>> closes.  In all likelihood I'll be sending selinux/next up to James
>> later this week and I'd like this to sit in linux-next for longer than
>> a few days.
>
> That means the change will land in 4.14 at the earliest, right? (Just
> out of curiosity.)

That's correct.  We are currently working towards a v4.12 release in
Linus' tree, the upcoming merge window will be for v4.13, and things
merged into selinux/next after that merge window will be for v4.14.

> By the way, refpolicy only grants "socket" permissions to a handful of
> domains, all of which also have the corresponding "unix_dgram_socket"
> permissions. The fedora policy does the same (according to Stephen);
> this only leaves custom policies to be potentially affected by this
> change.

While custom policies are definitely in the minority, we still need to
do out best not to break them without warning.

> Given that the SOCK_RAW->SOCK_DGRAM translation is obscure enough not to
> be documented anywhere outside the kernel sources, I doubt there are
> many users of it, anyway.

You very well may be right, I just felt that such a change requires
more than a week in the selinux/next tree.

Thank you for your patch, it's in the queue and I'll be merging it
into the selinux/next branch in a few weeks.

-- 
paul moore
www.paul-moore.com