Re: [RFC PATCH v1 2/3] LSM/x86/sgx: Implement SGX specific hooks in SELinux
From: Sean Christopherson <hidden>
Date: 2019-06-14 20:01:26
Also in:
lkml, selinux
From: Sean Christopherson <hidden>
Date: 2019-06-14 20:01:26
Also in:
lkml, selinux
On Fri, Jun 14, 2019 at 10:53:39AM -0700, Sean Christopherson wrote:
On Fri, Jun 14, 2019 at 10:45:56AM -0700, Sean Christopherson wrote:quoted
The state tracking of #2/#3 doesn't scare me, it's purely the auditing. Holding an audit message for an indeterminate amount of time is a nightmare. Here's a thought. What if we simply require FILE__EXECUTE or AA_EXEC_MAP to load any enclave page from a file? Alternatively, we could add an SGX specific file policity, e.g. FILE__ENCLAVELOAD and AA_MAY_LOAD_ENCLAVE. As in my other email, SELinux's W^X restrictions can be tied to the process, i.e. they can be checked at mmap()/mprotect() without throwing a wrench in auditing.We would also need to require VM_MAYEXEC on all enclave pages, or forego enforcing path_noexec() for enclaves.
Scratch that thought. Tying W^X restrictions to the process only works if its done at load time. E.g. If process A maps a page W and process B maps the same page X, then which process needs W^X depends on the order of mmap()/mprotect() between the two processes.