[PATCH v3] lockdown,selinux: fix wrong subject in some SELinux lockdown checks
steffen.klassert at secunet.com
Mon Jun 21 08:35:39 UTC 2021
On Wed, Jun 16, 2021 at 10:51:18AM +0200, Ondrej Mosnacek wrote:
> Commit 59438b46471a ("security,lockdown,selinux: implement SELinux
> lockdown") added an implementation of the locked_down LSM hook to
> SELinux, with the aim to restrict which domains are allowed to perform
> operations that would breach lockdown.
> However, in several places the security_locked_down() hook is called in
> situations where the current task isn't doing any action that would
> directly breach lockdown, leading to SELinux checks that are basically
> To fix this, add an explicit struct cred pointer argument to
> security_lockdown() and define NULL as a special value to pass instead
> of current_cred() in such situations. LSMs that take the subject
> credentials into account can then fall back to some default or ignore
> such calls altogether. In the SELinux lockdown hook implementation, use
> SECINITSID_KERNEL in case the cred argument is NULL.
> Most of the callers are updated to pass current_cred() as the cred
> pointer, thus maintaining the same behavior. The following callers are
> modified to pass NULL as the cred pointer instead:
> 1. arch/powerpc/xmon/xmon.c
> Seems to be some interactive debugging facility. It appears that
> the lockdown hook is called from interrupt context here, so it
> should be more appropriate to request a global lockdown decision.
> 2. fs/tracefs/inode.c:tracefs_create_file()
> Here the call is used to prevent creating new tracefs entries when
> the kernel is locked down. Assumes that locking down is one-way -
> i.e. if the hook returns non-zero once, it will never return zero
> again, thus no point in creating these files. Also, the hook is
> often called by a module's init function when it is loaded by
> userspace, where it doesn't make much sense to do a check against
> the current task's creds, since the task itself doesn't actually
> use the tracing functionality (i.e. doesn't breach lockdown), just
> indirectly makes some new tracepoints available to whoever is
> authorized to use them.
> 3. net/xfrm/xfrm_user.c:copy_to_user_*()
> Here a cryptographic secret is redacted based on the value returned
> from the hook. There are two possible actions that may lead here:
> a) A netlink message XFRM_MSG_GETSA with NLM_F_DUMP set - here the
> task context is relevant, since the dumped data is sent back to
> the current task.
> b) When adding/deleting/updating an SA via XFRM_MSG_xxxSA, the
> dumped SA is broadcasted to tasks subscribed to XFRM events -
> here the current task context is not relevant as it doesn't
> represent the tasks that could potentially see the secret.
> It doesn't seem worth it to try to keep using the current task's
> context in the a) case, since the eventual data leak can be
> circumvented anyway via b), plus there is no way for the task to
> indicate that it doesn't care about the actual key value, so the
> check could generate a lot of "false alert" denials with SELinux.
> Thus, let's pass NULL instead of current_cred() here faute de
> Improvements-suggested-by: Casey Schaufler <casey at schaufler-ca.com>
> Improvements-suggested-by: Paul Moore <paul at paul-moore.com>
> Fixes: 59438b46471a ("security,lockdown,selinux: implement SELinux lockdown")
> Signed-off-by: Ondrej Mosnacek <omosnace at redhat.com>
For the xfrm part:
Acked-by: Steffen Klassert <steffen.klassert at secunet.com>
More information about the Linux-security-module-archive