mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Casey Schaufler <casey@schaufler-ca.com>
To: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu>, Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com>
Cc: Stephen Smalley <sds@tycho.nsa.gov>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	"linux-unionfs@vger.kernel.org" <linux-unionfs@vger.kernel.org>,
	LSM <linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org>,
	Daniel J Walsh <dwalsh@redhat.com>,
	David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>,
	pmoore@redhat.com, Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
	linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/5] overlayfs: Use vfs_getxattr_noperm() for real inode
Date: Fri, 8 Jul 2016 08:28:21 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <afccd5f7-cf9f-396e-adf9-7166d9558430@schaufler-ca.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAJfpegvi7rwUTG172h=HkmoadJpPDq19MOxUMGcSZnr5U_7t4w@mail.gmail.com>

On 7/8/2016 12:06 AM, Miklos Szeredi wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 7, 2016 at 8:35 PM, Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com> wrote:
>> On Wed, Jul 06, 2016 at 04:58:37PM +0200, Miklos Szeredi wrote:
>>> On Wed, Jul 6, 2016 at 12:54 PM, Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com> wrote:
>>>> On Wed, Jul 06, 2016 at 06:36:49AM +0200, Miklos Szeredi wrote:
>>>>> On Tue, Jul 5, 2016 at 11:16 PM, Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com> wrote:
>>>>>> On Tue, Jul 05, 2016 at 01:29:39PM -0700, Casey Schaufler wrote:
>>>>>>> On 7/5/2016 8:50 AM, Vivek Goyal wrote:
>>>>>>>> ovl_getxattr() currently uses vfs_getxattr() on realinode. This fails
>>>>>>>> if mounter does not have DAC/MAC permission to access getxattr.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Specifically this becomes a problem when selinux is trying to initialize
>>>>>>>> overlay inode and does ->getxattr(overlay_inode). A task might trigger
>>>>>>>> initialization of overlay inode and we will access real inode xattr in the
>>>>>>>> context of mounter and if mounter does not have permissions, then inode
>>>>>>>> selinux context initialization fails and inode is labeled as unlabeled_t.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> One way to deal with it is to let SELinux do getxattr checks both on
>>>>>>>> overlay inode and underlying inode and overlay can call vfs_getxattr_noperm()
>>>>>>>> to make sure when selinux is trying to initialize label on inode, it does
>>>>>>>> not go through checks on lower levels and initialization is successful.
>>>>>>>> And after inode initialization, SELinux will make sure task has getatttr
>>>>>>>> permission.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> One issue with this approach is that it does not work for directories as
>>>>>>>> d_real() returns the overlay dentry for directories and not the underlying
>>>>>>>> directory dentry.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Another way to deal with it to introduce another function pointer in
>>>>>>>> inode_operations, say getxattr_noperm(), which is responsible to get
>>>>>>>> xattr without any checks. SELinux initialization code will call this
>>>>>>>> first if it is available on inode. So user space code path will call
>>>>>>>> ->getxattr() and that will go through checks and SELinux internal
>>>>>>>> initialization will call ->getxattr_noperm() and that will not
>>>>>>>> go through checks.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> For now, I am just converting ovl_getxattr() to get xattr without
>>>>>>>> any checks on underlying inode. That means it is possible for
>>>>>>>> a task to get xattr of a file/dir on lower/upper through overlay mount
>>>>>>>> while it is not possible outside overlay mount.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> If this is a major concern, I can look into implementing getxattr_noperm().
>>>>>>> This is a major concern.
>>>>>> Hmm.., In that case I will write patch to provide another inode operation
>>>>>> getxattr_noperm() and a wrapper which falls back to getxattr() if noperm
>>>>>> variant is not defined. That should take care of this issue.
>>>>> That's not going to fly.  A slighly better, but still quite ugly
>>>>> solution would be to add a "flags" arg to the current ->getxattr()
>>>>> callback indicating whether the caller wants permission checking
>>>>> inside the call or not.
>>>>>
>>>> Ok, will try that.
>>>>
>>>>> But we already have the current->creds.  Can't that be used to control
>>>>> the permission checking done by the callback?
>>>> Sorry, did not get how to use current->creds to control permission
>>>> checking.
>>> I'm not sure about the details either.  But current->creds *is* the
>>> context provided for the VFS and filesystems to check permissions.  It
>>> might make sense to use that to indicate to overlayfs that permission
>>> should not be checked.
>> That sounds like raising capabilities of task temporarily to do
>> getxattr(). But AFAIK, there is no cap which will override SELinux checks.
> So a new capability can be invented for this purpose?

SELinux does not use capabilities as an override mechanism.
The capability you would want if it did is CAP_MAC_OVERRIDE,
which is used by Smack. 

>
>> I am taking a step back re-thinking about the problem.
>>
>> - For context mounts this is not a problem at all as overlay inode will
>>   get its label from context= mount option and we will not call into
>>   ovl_getxattr().
>>
>> - For non-context mounts this is a problem only if mounter is not
>>   privileged enough to do getattr. And that's not going to be a common
>>   case either.
>>
>> IOW, this does not look like a common case. And if getxattr() fails,
>> SELinux already seems to mark inode as unlabeled_t. And my understanding
>> is that task can't access unlabeled_t anyway, so there is no information
>> leak.
>>
>> So for now, why not leave it as it is. Only side affect I seem to see
>> is following warnings on console.
>>
>> SELinux: inode_doinit_with_dentry:  getxattr returned 13 for dev=overlay ino=29147
>>
>> This is for information purposes only and given getxattr() can fail in
>> stacked configuration, I think we can change this to KERN_DEBUG instead
>> of KERN_WARNING.
> I'm fine with this as well.
>
> Thanks,
> Miklos
>

      reply	other threads:[~2016-07-08 15:28 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 39+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-07-05 15:50 [PATCH 0/5][RFC] Overlayfs SELinux Support Vivek Goyal
2016-07-05 15:50 ` [PATCH 1/5] security, overlayfs: provide copy up security hook for unioned files Vivek Goyal
2016-07-05 16:53   ` kbuild test robot
2016-07-05 17:43     ` Vivek Goyal
2016-07-05 17:20   ` kbuild test robot
2016-07-05 19:36   ` Casey Schaufler
2016-07-05 20:42     ` Vivek Goyal
2016-07-07 20:33     ` Vivek Goyal
2016-07-07 21:44       ` Casey Schaufler
2016-07-08  7:21         ` Miklos Szeredi
2016-07-08 12:45           ` Vivek Goyal
2016-07-08 13:42             ` Vivek Goyal
2016-07-08 15:34               ` Casey Schaufler
2016-07-05 21:35   ` Paul Moore
2016-07-05 21:52     ` Vivek Goyal
2016-07-05 22:03       ` Paul Moore
2016-07-05 15:50 ` [PATCH 2/5] security,overlayfs: Provide security hook for copy up of xattrs for overlay file Vivek Goyal
2016-07-05 20:22   ` Casey Schaufler
2016-07-05 21:15     ` Vivek Goyal
2016-07-05 21:34       ` Casey Schaufler
2016-07-06 17:09         ` Vivek Goyal
2016-07-06 17:50           ` Vivek Goyal
2016-07-06 19:01           ` Vivek Goyal
2016-07-06 19:22             ` Casey Schaufler
2016-07-05 21:45   ` Paul Moore
2016-07-05 21:53     ` Vivek Goyal
2016-07-05 15:50 ` [PATCH 3/5] selinux: Pass security pointer to determine_inode_label() Vivek Goyal
2016-07-05 20:25   ` Casey Schaufler
2016-07-05 21:09     ` Vivek Goyal
2016-07-05 15:50 ` [PATCH 4/5] overlayfs: Correctly label newly created file over whiteout Vivek Goyal
2016-07-05 15:50 ` [PATCH 5/5] overlayfs: Use vfs_getxattr_noperm() for real inode Vivek Goyal
2016-07-05 20:29   ` Casey Schaufler
2016-07-05 21:16     ` Vivek Goyal
2016-07-06  4:36       ` Miklos Szeredi
2016-07-06 10:54         ` Vivek Goyal
2016-07-06 14:58           ` Miklos Szeredi
2016-07-07 18:35             ` Vivek Goyal
2016-07-08  7:06               ` Miklos Szeredi
2016-07-08 15:28                 ` Casey Schaufler [this message]

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=afccd5f7-cf9f-396e-adf9-7166d9558430@schaufler-ca.com \
    --to=casey@schaufler-ca.com \
    --cc=dhowells@redhat.com \
    --cc=dwalsh@redhat.com \
    --cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-unionfs@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=miklos@szeredi.hu \
    --cc=pmoore@redhat.com \
    --cc=sds@tycho.nsa.gov \
    --cc=vgoyal@redhat.com \
    --cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
    /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

all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®