Re: [RFC PATCH 0/4] Split security_task_getsecid() into subj and obj variants
From: Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.ibm.com>
Date: 2021-02-23 14:15:40
Also in:
selinux
On Mon, 2021-02-22 at 15:58 -0800, Casey Schaufler wrote:
On 2/20/2021 6:41 AM, Paul Moore wrote:quoted
On Fri, Feb 19, 2021 at 8:49 PM Casey Schaufler [off-list ref] wrote:quoted
On 2/19/2021 3:28 PM, Paul Moore wrote:quoted
As discussed briefly on the list (lore link below), we are a little sloppy when it comes to using task credentials, mixing both the subjective and object credentials. This patch set attempts to fix this by replacing security_task_getsecid() with two new hooks that return either the subjective (_subj) or objective (_obj) credentials. https://lore.kernel.org/linux-security-module/806848326.0ifERbkFSE@x2/T/ (local) Casey and John, I made a quick pass through the Smack and AppArmor code in an effort to try and do the right thing, but I will admit that I haven't tested those changes, just the SELinux code. I would really appreciate your help in reviewing those changes. If you find it easier, feel free to wholesale replace my Smack/AppArmor patch with one of your own.A quick test pass didn't show up anything obviously amiss with the Smack changes. I have will do some more through inspection, but they look fine so far.Thanks for testing it out and giving it a look. Beyond the Smack specific changes, I'm also interested in making sure all the hook callers are correct; I believe I made the correct substitutions, but a second (or third (or fourth ...)) set of eyes is never a bad idea.I'm still not seeing anything that looks wrong. I'd suggest that Mimi have a look at the IMA bits.
Thanks, Casey, Paul. The IMA changes look fine. IMA policy rules are normally written in terms of a file's LSM labels, the obj_type, so hopefully this change has minimal, if any, impact. Mimi