Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Date:   Wed, 19 Feb 2020 13:13:47 -0500
From:   "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@fieldses.org>
To:     Richard Haines <richard_c_haines@btinternet.com>
Cc:     smayhew@redhat.com, paul@paul-moore.com, sds@tycho.nsa.gov,
        selinux@vger.kernel.org, linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Test to trace NFS unlabeled bug
Message-ID: <20200219181347.GB23275@fieldses.org>
References: <db2a9d661ec9b53e01c029f98877a3556d8297bc.camel@btinternet.com>
 <20200219180720.GA23275@fieldses.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20200219180720.GA23275@fieldses.org>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
Sender: linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Wed, Feb 19, 2020 at 01:07:20PM -0500, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 19, 2020 at 06:03:02PM +0000, Richard Haines wrote:
> > I've been building selinux-testsuite tests for various filesystems and
> > have come across an unlabeled issue when testing. Stephen thinks that
> > this is a bug sometimes seen with labeled NFS, where the top-level
> > mounted directory shows up with unlabeled_t initially, then later gets
> > refreshed to a valid context.
> > 
> > I've put together a test script, policy module and mount prog to
> > facilitate debugging this issue. I've set out how I tested this on a
> > Fedora 31 system below, if any problems let me know. 
> 
> Thanks!  Adding the nfs group to the cc.
> 
> I seem to recall a report of a similar bug in the Red Hat bugzilla, that
> I spent a little time investigating and couldn't pin down.  I'll see if
> I can dig that up.

This one:

	https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1625955

It should be publicy visible.

--b.