SGX vs LSM (Re: [PATCH v20 00/28] Intel SGX1 support)
Sean Christopherson
sean.j.christopherson at intel.com
Fri May 17 17:55:00 UTC 2019
On Fri, May 17, 2019 at 10:43:01AM -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
>
> > On May 17, 2019, at 10:29 AM, Sean Christopherson <sean.j.christopherson at intel.com> wrote:
> >
> > AIUI, having FILE__WRITE and FILE__EXECUTE on /dev/sgx/enclave would allow
> > *any* enclave/process to map EPC as RWX. Moving to anon inodes and thus
> > PROCESS__EXECMEM achieves per-process granularity.
>
> How does anon_inode make any difference? Anon_inode is not the same thing as
> anon_vma.
In this snippet, IS_PRIVATE() is true for anon inodes, false for
/dev/sgx/enclave. Because EPC memory is always shared, SELinux will never
check PROCESS__EXECMEM for mprotect() on/dev/sgx/enclave.
static int file_map_prot_check(struct file *file, unsigned long prot, int shared)
{
const struct cred *cred = current_cred();
u32 sid = cred_sid(cred);
int rc = 0;
if (default_noexec &&
(prot & PROT_EXEC) && (!file || IS_PRIVATE(file_inode(file)) ||
(!shared && (prot & PROT_WRITE)))) {
/*
* We are making executable an anonymous mapping or a
* private file mapping that will also be writable.
* This has an additional check.
*/
rc = avc_has_perm(&selinux_state,
sid, sid, SECCLASS_PROCESS,
PROCESS__EXECMEM, NULL);
if (rc)
goto error;
}
...
}
More information about the Linux-security-module-archive
mailing list