[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20200618010805.600873-112-sashal@kernel.org>
Date: Wed, 17 Jun 2020 21:03:29 -0400
From: Sasha Levin <sashal@...nel.org>
To: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, stable@...r.kernel.org
Cc: John Johansen <john.johansen@...onical.com>,
Sasha Levin <sashal@...nel.org>,
linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH AUTOSEL 5.7 112/388] apparmor: fix nnp subset test for unconfined
From: John Johansen <john.johansen@...onical.com>
[ Upstream commit 3ed4aaa94fc07db3cd0c91be95e3e1b9782a2710 ]
The subset test is not taking into account the unconfined exception
which will cause profile transitions in the stacked confinement
case to fail when no_new_privs is applied.
This fixes a regression introduced in the fix for
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1839037
BugLink: https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1844186
Signed-off-by: John Johansen <john.johansen@...onical.com>
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@...nel.org>
---
security/apparmor/domain.c | 9 +++++----
security/apparmor/include/label.h | 1 +
security/apparmor/label.c | 33 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
3 files changed, 39 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
diff --git a/security/apparmor/domain.c b/security/apparmor/domain.c
index a84ef030fbd7..4cfa58c07778 100644
--- a/security/apparmor/domain.c
+++ b/security/apparmor/domain.c
@@ -929,7 +929,8 @@ int apparmor_bprm_set_creds(struct linux_binprm *bprm)
* aways results in a further reduction of permissions.
*/
if ((bprm->unsafe & LSM_UNSAFE_NO_NEW_PRIVS) &&
- !unconfined(label) && !aa_label_is_subset(new, ctx->nnp)) {
+ !unconfined(label) &&
+ !aa_label_is_unconfined_subset(new, ctx->nnp)) {
error = -EPERM;
info = "no new privs";
goto audit;
@@ -1207,7 +1208,7 @@ int aa_change_hat(const char *hats[], int count, u64 token, int flags)
* reduce restrictions.
*/
if (task_no_new_privs(current) && !unconfined(label) &&
- !aa_label_is_subset(new, ctx->nnp)) {
+ !aa_label_is_unconfined_subset(new, ctx->nnp)) {
/* not an apparmor denial per se, so don't log it */
AA_DEBUG("no_new_privs - change_hat denied");
error = -EPERM;
@@ -1228,7 +1229,7 @@ int aa_change_hat(const char *hats[], int count, u64 token, int flags)
* reduce restrictions.
*/
if (task_no_new_privs(current) && !unconfined(label) &&
- !aa_label_is_subset(previous, ctx->nnp)) {
+ !aa_label_is_unconfined_subset(previous, ctx->nnp)) {
/* not an apparmor denial per se, so don't log it */
AA_DEBUG("no_new_privs - change_hat denied");
error = -EPERM;
@@ -1423,7 +1424,7 @@ int aa_change_profile(const char *fqname, int flags)
* reduce restrictions.
*/
if (task_no_new_privs(current) && !unconfined(label) &&
- !aa_label_is_subset(new, ctx->nnp)) {
+ !aa_label_is_unconfined_subset(new, ctx->nnp)) {
/* not an apparmor denial per se, so don't log it */
AA_DEBUG("no_new_privs - change_hat denied");
error = -EPERM;
diff --git a/security/apparmor/include/label.h b/security/apparmor/include/label.h
index 47942c4ba7ca..255764ab06e2 100644
--- a/security/apparmor/include/label.h
+++ b/security/apparmor/include/label.h
@@ -281,6 +281,7 @@ bool aa_label_init(struct aa_label *label, int size, gfp_t gfp);
struct aa_label *aa_label_alloc(int size, struct aa_proxy *proxy, gfp_t gfp);
bool aa_label_is_subset(struct aa_label *set, struct aa_label *sub);
+bool aa_label_is_unconfined_subset(struct aa_label *set, struct aa_label *sub);
struct aa_profile *__aa_label_next_not_in_set(struct label_it *I,
struct aa_label *set,
struct aa_label *sub);
diff --git a/security/apparmor/label.c b/security/apparmor/label.c
index 6c3acae701ef..5f324d63ceaa 100644
--- a/security/apparmor/label.c
+++ b/security/apparmor/label.c
@@ -550,6 +550,39 @@ bool aa_label_is_subset(struct aa_label *set, struct aa_label *sub)
return __aa_label_next_not_in_set(&i, set, sub) == NULL;
}
+/**
+ * aa_label_is_unconfined_subset - test if @sub is a subset of @set
+ * @set: label to test against
+ * @sub: label to test if is subset of @set
+ *
+ * This checks for subset but taking into account unconfined. IF
+ * @sub contains an unconfined profile that does not have a matching
+ * unconfined in @set then this will not cause the test to fail.
+ * Conversely we don't care about an unconfined in @set that is not in
+ * @sub
+ *
+ * Returns: true if @sub is special_subset of @set
+ * else false
+ */
+bool aa_label_is_unconfined_subset(struct aa_label *set, struct aa_label *sub)
+{
+ struct label_it i = { };
+ struct aa_profile *p;
+
+ AA_BUG(!set);
+ AA_BUG(!sub);
+
+ if (sub == set)
+ return true;
+
+ do {
+ p = __aa_label_next_not_in_set(&i, set, sub);
+ if (p && !profile_unconfined(p))
+ break;
+ } while (p);
+
+ return p == NULL;
+}
/**
--
2.25.1
Powered by blists - more mailing lists