netdev - Re: [RFC PATCH 0/2] selinux: avoid nf hooks overhead when not needed

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, 06 Apr 2016 16:03:44 +0200
From:	Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>
To:	Paul Moore <paul@...l-moore.com>
Cc:	linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	James Morris <james.l.morris@...cle.com>,
	Andreas Gruenbacher <agruenba@...hat.com>,
	Stephen Smalley <sds@...ho.nsa.gov>,
	Florian Westphal <fw@...len.de>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	selinux@...ho.nsa.gov
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/2] selinux: avoid nf hooks overhead when not needed

On Wed, 2016-04-06 at 08:33 -0400, Paul Moore wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 6, 2016 at 5:51 AM, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com> wrote:
> > Currently, selinux always registers iptables POSTROUTING hooks regarless of
> > the running policy needs for any action to be performed by them.
> >
> > Even the socket_sock_rcv_skb() is always registered, but it can result in a no-op
> > depending on the current policy configuration.
> >
> > The above invocations in the kernel datapath are cause of measurable
> > overhead in networking performance test.
> >
> > This patch series adds explicit notification for netlabel status change
> > (other relevant status change, like xfrm and secmark, are already notified to
> > LSM) and use this information in selinux to register the above hooks only when
> > the current status makes them relevant, deregistering them when no-op
> >
> > Avoiding the LSM hooks overhead, in netperf UDP_STREAM test with small packets,
> > gives about 5% performance improvement on rx and about 8% on tx.
> 
> [NOTE: added the SELinux mailing list to the CC line, please include
> when submitting SELinux patches]
> 
> While I appreciate the patch and the work that went into development
> and testing, I'm going to reject this patch on the grounds that it
> conflicts with work we've just started thinking about which should
> bring some tangible security benefit.
> 
> The recent addition of post-init read only memory opens up some
> interesting possibilities for SELinux and LSMs in general, the thing
> which we've just started looking at is marking the LSM hook structure
> read only after init.  There are some complicating factors for
> SELinux, but I'm confident those can be resolved, and from what I can
> tell marking the hooks read only will have no effect on other LSMs.
> While marking the LSM hook structure doesn't directly affect the
> SELinux netfilter hooks, once we remove the ability to deregister the
> LSM hooks we will have no need to support deregistering netfilter
> hooks and I expect we will drop that functionality as well to help
> decrease the risk of tampering.

What if we drops the selinux hook related changes in the second patch
(the on-demand socket_sock_rcv_skb() [de-]registration)?

The patch will not conflict with the LSM hook structure becoming
read-only, we still retain the ability of registering/de-registering the
netfilter hooks, and that will still affect positively the tx network
performance.

Regards,

Paolo