Re: [PATCH v4 4/4] vduse: Add LSM hooks to check Virtio device type

[Maxime Coquelin <maxime.coquelin@redhat.com>]

On 12/8/23 13:26, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 08, 2023 at 01:23:00PM +0100, Maxime Coquelin wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 12/8/23 12:05, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
>>> On Fri, Dec 08, 2023 at 12:01:15PM +0100, Maxime Coquelin wrote:
>>>> Hello Paul,
>>>>
>>>> On 11/8/23 03:31, Paul Moore wrote:
>>>>> On Oct 20, 2023 "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This patch introduces LSM hooks for devices creation,
>>>>>> destruction and opening operations, checking the
>>>>>> application is allowed to perform these operations for
>>>>>> the Virtio device type.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Maxime Coquelin <maxime.coquelin@redhat.com>
>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>     drivers/vdpa/vdpa_user/vduse_dev.c  | 12 +++++++
>>>>>>     include/linux/lsm_hook_defs.h       |  4 +++
>>>>>>     include/linux/security.h            | 15 ++++++++
>>>>>>     security/security.c                 | 42 ++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>>>>     security/selinux/hooks.c            | 55 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>>>>     security/selinux/include/classmap.h |  2 ++
>>>>>>     6 files changed, 130 insertions(+)
>>>>>
>>>>> My apologies for the late reply, I've been trying to work my way through
>>>>> the review backlog but it has been taking longer than expected; comments
>>>>> below ...
>>>>
>>>> No worries, I have also been busy these days.
>>>>
>>>>>> diff --git a/security/selinux/hooks.c b/security/selinux/hooks.c
>>>>>> index 2aa0e219d721..65d9262a37f7 100644
>>>>>> --- a/security/selinux/hooks.c
>>>>>> +++ b/security/selinux/hooks.c
>>>>>> @@ -21,6 +21,7 @@
>>>>>>      *  Copyright (C) 2016 Mellanox Technologies
>>>>>>      */
>>>>>> +#include "av_permissions.h"
>>>>>>     #include <linux/init.h>
>>>>>>     #include <linux/kd.h>
>>>>>>     #include <linux/kernel.h>
>>>>>> @@ -92,6 +93,7 @@
>>>>>>     #include <linux/fsnotify.h>
>>>>>>     #include <linux/fanotify.h>
>>>>>>     #include <linux/io_uring.h>
>>>>>> +#include <uapi/linux/virtio_ids.h>
>>>>>>     #include "avc.h"
>>>>>>     #include "objsec.h"
>>>>>> @@ -6950,6 +6952,56 @@ static int selinux_uring_cmd(struct io_uring_cmd *ioucmd)
>>>>>>     }
>>>>>>     #endif /* CONFIG_IO_URING */
>>>>>> +static int vduse_check_device_type(u32 sid, u32 device_id)
>>>>>> +{
>>>>>> +	u32 requested;
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> +	if (device_id == VIRTIO_ID_NET)
>>>>>> +		requested = VDUSE__NET;
>>>>>> +	else if (device_id == VIRTIO_ID_BLOCK)
>>>>>> +		requested = VDUSE__BLOCK;
>>>>>> +	else
>>>>>> +		return -EINVAL;
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> +	return avc_has_perm(sid, sid, SECCLASS_VDUSE, requested, NULL);
>>>>>> +}
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> +static int selinux_vduse_dev_create(u32 device_id)
>>>>>> +{
>>>>>> +	u32 sid = current_sid();
>>>>>> +	int ret;
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> +	ret = avc_has_perm(sid, sid, SECCLASS_VDUSE, VDUSE__DEVCREATE, NULL);
>>>>>> +	if (ret)
>>>>>> +		return ret;
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> +	return vduse_check_device_type(sid, device_id);
>>>>>> +}
>>>>>
>>>>> I see there has been some discussion about the need for a dedicated
>>>>> create hook as opposed to using the existing ioctl controls.  I think
>>>>> one important point that has been missing from the discussion is the
>>>>> idea of labeling the newly created device.  Unfortunately prior to a
>>>>> few minutes ago I hadn't ever looked at VDUSE so please correct me if
>>>>> I get some things wrong :)
>>>>>
>>>>>    From what I can see userspace creates a new VDUSE device with
>>>>> ioctl(VDUSE_CREATE_DEV), which trigger the creation of a new
>>>>> /dev/vduse/XXX device which will be labeled according to the udev
>>>>> and SELinux configuration, likely with a generic udev label.  My
>>>>> question is if we want to be able to uniquely label each VDUSE
>>>>> device based on the process that initiates the device creation
>>>>> with the call to ioctl()?  If that is the case, we would need a
>>>>> create hook not only to control the creation of the device, but to
>>>>> record the triggering process' label in the new device; this label
>>>>> would then be used in subsequent VDUSE open and destroy operations.
>>>>> The normal device file I/O operations would still be subject to the
>>>>> standard SELinux file I/O permissions using the device file label
>>>>> assigned by systemd/udev when the device was created.
>>>>
>>>> I don't think we need a unique label for VDUSE devices, but maybe
>>>> Michael thinks otherwise?
>>>
>>> I don't know.
>>> All this is consumed by libvirt, you need to ask these guys.
>>
>> I think it is not consumed by libvirt, at least not in the usecases I
>> have in mind. For networking devices, it will be consumed by OVS.
>>
>> Maxime
> 
> OK, ovs then :)
> 

Adding Aaron, our go-to person for SELinux-related topics for OVS, but I 
think we don't need to do relabeling for VDUSE chardevs.

Aaron, do you confirm?

Maxime