Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751328AbbGKTnn (ORCPT ); Sat, 11 Jul 2015 15:43:43 -0400 Received: from mail-pa0-f54.google.com ([209.85.220.54]:32990 "EHLO mail-pa0-f54.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751131AbbGKTnl (ORCPT ); Sat, 11 Jul 2015 15:43:41 -0400 Date: Sat, 11 Jul 2015 12:43:31 -0700 (PDT) From: Hugh Dickins X-X-Sender: hugh@eggly.anvils To: Stephen Smalley cc: paul@paul-moore.com, hughd@google.com, prarit@redhat.com, mstevens@fedoraproject.org, esandeen@redhat.com, david@fromorbit.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, eparis@redhat.com, linux-mm@kvack.org, wagi@monom.org, selinux@tycho.nsa.gov, akpm@linux-foundation.org, torvalds@linux-foundation.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] selinux: fix mprotect PROT_EXEC regression caused by mm change In-Reply-To: <1436535659-13124-1-git-send-email-sds@tycho.nsa.gov> Message-ID: References: <1436535659-13124-1-git-send-email-sds@tycho.nsa.gov> User-Agent: Alpine 2.11 (LSU 23 2013-08-11) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2873 Lines: 60 On Fri, 10 Jul 2015, Stephen Smalley wrote: > commit 66fc13039422ba7df2d01a8ee0873e4ef965b50b ("mm: shmem_zero_setup skip > security check and lockdep conflict with XFS") caused a regression for > SELinux by disabling any SELinux checking of mprotect PROT_EXEC on > shared anonymous mappings. However, even before that regression, the > checking on such mprotect PROT_EXEC calls was inconsistent with the > checking on a mmap PROT_EXEC call for a shared anonymous mapping. On a > mmap, the security hook is passed a NULL file and knows it is dealing with > an anonymous mapping and therefore applies an execmem check and no file > checks. On a mprotect, the security hook is passed a vma with a > non-NULL vm_file (as this was set from the internally-created shmem > file during mmap) and therefore applies the file-based execute check and > no execmem check. Since the aforementioned commit now marks the shmem > zero inode with the S_PRIVATE flag, the file checks are disabled and > we have no checking at all on mprotect PROT_EXEC. Add a test to > the mprotect hook logic for such private inodes, and apply an execmem > check in that case. This makes the mmap and mprotect checking consistent > for shared anonymous mappings, as well as for /dev/zero and ashmem. > > Signed-off-by: Stephen Smalley Thank you for correcting that, Stephen (and for the nicely detailed commit description): it looks right to me so I'll say Acked-by: Hugh Dickins but I know far too little of SElinux, and its defaults, to confirm whether it actually does all you need - I'll trust you on that. (There being various other references to the file in file_map_prot_check() and selinux_file_mprotect(), and I couldn't tell if they should or should not be modified by IS_PRIVATE(file_inode(file) checks too: my best guess was that they wouldn't matter.) > --- > security/selinux/hooks.c | 3 ++- > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/security/selinux/hooks.c b/security/selinux/hooks.c > index 6231081..564079c 100644 > --- a/security/selinux/hooks.c > +++ b/security/selinux/hooks.c > @@ -3283,7 +3283,8 @@ static int file_map_prot_check(struct file *file, unsigned long prot, int shared > int rc = 0; > > if (default_noexec && > - (prot & PROT_EXEC) && (!file || (!shared && (prot & PROT_WRITE)))) { > + (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. > -- > 2.1.0 -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/