[PATCH V4 2/3] IMA: Use consistent creds

Matthew Garrett mjg59 at google.com
Wed Jan 3 18:11:14 UTC 2018

On Wed, Jan 3, 2018 at 7:54 AM, Casey Schaufler <casey at schaufler-ca.com> wrote:
> On 1/2/2018 5:20 PM, Matthew Garrett wrote:
>> Right now most of the IMA code is using current->creds, but the LSM
>> checks are using security_task_getsecid() which ends up looking at
>> real_creds. Switch to using security_cred_getsecid() in order to make
>> this consistent.
> security_filter_rule_match() is security_audit_rule_match() in
> sheep's clothing. Using the cred secid in this case, where the
> task secid is used elsewhere is going to lead to tears. It's
> going to make *me* cry as I work on untangling secids for
> stacking/namespaces. I can't predict how else it's going to
> bite us, but I'm betting on it.

The problem here is that we don't *have* the task secid for one of the
cases I care about. Validating the task secid at execution time gives
us the security context of the spawning process, rather than the
spawned one - by the time it's committed to the task structure, it's
too late to block execution, so all we have is the secid associated
with the creds in the bprm structure. Obviously fixing this in a way
that doesn't break your work is important, so any suggestions on how I
should be fixing this? :)
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-security-module" in
the body of a message to majordomo at vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

More information about the Linux-security-module-archive mailing list