[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAHC9VhTrrJN9MRZD5XWXJiygq+jVN-xiRc-wkZP3tYB-2D+Frg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 29 Dec 2023 16:52:23 -0500
From: Paul Moore <paul@...l-moore.com>
To: Mickaël Salaün <mic@...ikod.net>
Cc: Eric Paris <eparis@...isplace.org>, Stephen Smalley <stephen.smalley.work@...il.com>,
Günther Noack <gnoack@...gle.com>,
Konstantin Meskhidze <konstantin.meskhidze@...wei.com>,
Muhammad Usama Anjum <usama.anjum@...labora.com>, linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org,
netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] selinux: Fix error priority for bind with AF_UNSPEC on
AF_INET6 socket
On Fri, Dec 29, 2023 at 12:19 PM Mickaël Salaün <mic@...ikod.net> wrote:
>
> The IPv6 network stack first checks the sockaddr length (-EINVAL error)
> before checking the family (-EAFNOSUPPORT error).
>
> This was discovered thanks to commit a549d055a22e ("selftests/landlock:
> Add network tests").
>
> Cc: Eric Paris <eparis@...isplace.org>
> Cc: Konstantin Meskhidze <konstantin.meskhidze@...wei.com>
> Cc: Paul Moore <paul@...l-moore.com>
> Cc: Stephen Smalley <stephen.smalley.work@...il.com>
> Reported-by: Muhammad Usama Anjum <usama.anjum@...labora.com>
> Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/r/0584f91c-537c-4188-9e4f-04f192565667@collabora.com
> Fixes: 0f8db8cc73df ("selinux: add AF_UNSPEC and INADDR_ANY checks to selinux_socket_bind()")
> Signed-off-by: Mickaël Salaün <mic@...ikod.net>
> ---
>
> Changes since v1:
> https://lore.kernel.org/r/20231228113917.62089-1-mic@digikod.net
> * Use the "family" variable (suggested by Paul).
> ---
> security/selinux/hooks.c | 3 +++
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/security/selinux/hooks.c b/security/selinux/hooks.c
> index feda711c6b7b..748baa98f623 100644
> --- a/security/selinux/hooks.c
> +++ b/security/selinux/hooks.c
> @@ -4667,6 +4667,9 @@ static int selinux_socket_bind(struct socket *sock, struct sockaddr *address, in
> return -EINVAL;
> addr4 = (struct sockaddr_in *)address;
> if (family_sa == AF_UNSPEC) {
> + if (family == AF_INET6 &&
> + addrlen < SIN6_LEN_RFC2133)
> + return -EINVAL;
If we want to try and match the non-LSM PF_INET6 socket handling as
much as possible, after the length check (above) we should fail any
non AF_INET6 addresses on an INET6 sock, see __inet6_bind().
My guess is we want something like this:
if (family == AF_INET6) {
/* length check from inet6_bind_sk() */
if (addrlen < SIN6_LEN_RFC2133)
return -EINVAL;
/* !AF_INET6 check from __inet6_bind() */
goto err_af;
}
> /* see __inet_bind(), we only want to allow
> * AF_UNSPEC if the address is INADDR_ANY
> */
> --
> 2.43.0
--
paul-moore.com
Powered by blists - more mailing lists