netdev - Re: [PATCH v3] lockdown,selinux: fix wrong subject in some SELinux lockdown checks

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:   Tue, 31 Aug 2021 11:58:05 -0700
From:   Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>
To:     Paul Moore <paul@...l-moore.com>
Cc:     Ondrej Mosnacek <omosnace@...hat.com>,
        Linux Security Module list 
        <linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org>,
        James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org>,
        Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        Steffen Klassert <steffen.klassert@...unet.com>,
        Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>,
        "David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Stephen Smalley <stephen.smalley.work@...il.com>,
        SElinux list <selinux@...r.kernel.org>,
        linuxppc-dev <linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org>,
        X86 ML <x86@...nel.org>,
        Linux ACPI <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-cxl@...r.kernel.org, linux-efi <linux-efi@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux PCI <linux-pci@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux-pm mailing list <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-serial@...r.kernel.org, bpf <bpf@...r.kernel.org>,
        Netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        Kexec Mailing List <kexec@...ts.infradead.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Casey Schaufler <casey@...aufler-ca.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] lockdown,selinux: fix wrong subject in some SELinux
 lockdown checks

On Tue, Aug 31, 2021 at 6:53 AM Paul Moore <paul@...l-moore.com> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Aug 31, 2021 at 5:09 AM Ondrej Mosnacek <omosnace@...hat.com> wrote:
> > On Sat, Jun 19, 2021 at 12:18 AM Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com> wrote:
> > > On Wed, Jun 16, 2021 at 1:51 AM Ondrej Mosnacek <omosnace@...hat.com> wrote:
>
> ...
>
> > > > diff --git a/drivers/cxl/mem.c b/drivers/cxl/mem.c
> > > > index 2acc6173da36..c1747b6555c7 100644
> > > > --- a/drivers/cxl/mem.c
> > > > +++ b/drivers/cxl/mem.c
> > > > @@ -568,7 +568,7 @@ static bool cxl_mem_raw_command_allowed(u16 opcode)
> > > >         if (!IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_CXL_MEM_RAW_COMMANDS))
> > > >                 return false;
> > > >
> > > > -       if (security_locked_down(LOCKDOWN_NONE))
> > > > +       if (security_locked_down(current_cred(), LOCKDOWN_NONE))
> > >
> > > Acked-by: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>
> > >
> > > ...however that usage looks wrong. The expectation is that if kernel
> > > integrity protections are enabled then raw command access should be
> > > disabled. So I think that should be equivalent to LOCKDOWN_PCI_ACCESS
> > > in terms of the command capabilities to filter.
> >
> > Yes, the LOCKDOWN_NONE seems wrong here... but it's a pre-existing bug
> > and I didn't want to go down yet another rabbit hole trying to fix it.
> > I'll look at this again once this patch is settled - it may indeed be
> > as simple as replacing LOCKDOWN_NONE with LOCKDOWN_PCI_ACCESS.
>
> At this point you should be well aware of my distaste for merging
> patches that have known bugs in them.  Yes, this is a pre-existing
> condition, but it seems well within the scope of this work to address
> it as well.
>
> This isn't something that is going to get merged while the merge
> window is open, so at the very least you've got almost two weeks to
> sort this out - please do that.

Yes, apologies, I should have sent the fix shortly after noticing the
problem. I'll get the CXL bug fix out of the way so Ondrej can move
this along.