mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: James Morris <jmorris@namei.org>
To: Chris Wright <chrisw@osdl.org>
Cc: David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>,
	keyrings@linux-nfs.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Stephen Smalley <sds@tycho.nsa.gov>
Subject: Re: [Keyrings] [PATCH] Keys: Add LSM hooks for key management
Date: Thu, 6 Oct 2005 04:03:58 -0400 (EDT)	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.63.0510060346140.25593@excalibur.intercode> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20051005211030.GC16352@shell0.pdx.osdl.net>

On Wed, 5 Oct 2005, Chris Wright wrote:

> What case causes context != current?

Indeed, this is critical: we always need to know which task initiated the 
current action.  If it's not current, then we need the calling task struct 
passed into the security hook.

> > +	/* do a final security check before publishing the key */
> > +	ret = security_key_alloc(key);
> 
> This may simply be allocating space for the label (and possibly labelling)
> not necessarily a security check.

Agree, in fact, I think we should always aim to keep housekeeping hooks 
separate from access control hooks.

Access checks seem to be usually done before this point via 
lookup_user_key(), which is ideal.

> > - error:
> > +	/* let the security module know the key has been published */
> > +	security_key_post_alloc(key);
> 
> This is odd, esp since nothing could have failed between alloc and
> publish.  Only state change is serial number.  Would you expect the
> security module to update a label based on serial number?

I don't think SELinux would care about this yet.  If so, the hook can be 
added later.

> > +	/* if we're not the sysadmin, we can only change a key that we own */
> > +	if (capable(CAP_SYS_ADMIN) || key->uid == current->fsuid)
> > +		ret = security_key_set_security(key, name, data, dlen);
> 
> Are you sure this is right?  Normally I'd expect users can _not_ set the
> security labels of their own keys.  But perhaps I've missed the point
> of this one, could you give a use case?

I think this is like xattrs on files, where the user can set and view 
security attributes.

In any case, I don't see why you'd use a DAC check here at all, as this is 
a complete passthrough to the security module.

key_get_security() has no DAC check.


> This would be a whole lot easier if keys were available in keyfs ;-)

Yes, then standard setxattr() getxattr() syscalls could be used, and we 
can avoid two new multiplexed syscalls.

David, admit it, this key stuff is all really a filesystem :-)


- James
-- 
James Morris
<jmorris@namei.org>

  reply	other threads:[~2005-10-06  8:04 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2005-10-05 16:28 David Howells
2005-10-05 16:44 ` [Keyrings] " James Morris
2005-10-05 16:48 ` David Howells
2005-10-05 19:31   ` James Morris
2005-10-05 18:40 ` serue
2005-10-05 21:10 ` [Keyrings] " Chris Wright
2005-10-06  8:03   ` James Morris [this message]
2005-10-06 10:54   ` David Howells
2005-10-06 15:04     ` James Morris
2005-10-06 15:18     ` David Howells
2005-10-06 16:02       ` James Morris
2005-10-07  8:50       ` David Howells
2005-10-07 18:36         ` Chris Wright
2005-10-06 17:58     ` Chris Wright
2005-10-07  9:10     ` David Howells
2005-10-07 12:59       ` Stephen Smalley
2005-10-07 18:51       ` Chris Wright
2005-10-06  8:38 ` James Morris
2005-10-06 10:30 ` David Howells
2005-10-06 23:10   ` Chris Wright
2005-10-07  9:57   ` David Howells
2005-10-07 19:36     ` Chris Wright
2005-10-06 11:06 ` David Howells
2005-10-06 14:25   ` James Morris
2005-10-06 15:11   ` David Howells
2005-10-06 16:14     ` James Morris
2005-10-07  9:03     ` David Howells
2005-10-07 14:05       ` James Morris

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=Pine.LNX.4.63.0510060346140.25593@excalibur.intercode \
    --to=jmorris@namei.org \
    --cc=akpm@osdl.org \
    --cc=chrisw@osdl.org \
    --cc=dhowells@redhat.com \
    --cc=keyrings@linux-nfs.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=sds@tycho.nsa.gov \
    --cc=torvalds@osdl.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox

Powered by JetHome