From: dwalsh@redhat.com (Daniel J Walsh) Date: Thu, 03 Mar 2011 10:32:27 -0500 Subject: [refpolicy] [patch 1/3] Implementation of system conf type In-Reply-To: <1299163002.19257.15.camel@tesla.lan> References: <4D5E95C1.9080805@redhat.com> <20110219095711.GA6270@siphos.be> <1298180267.3098.11.camel@tesla.lan> <4D62875A.8060006@redhat.com> <1298319075.11119.3.camel@tesla.lan> <4D63DA61.3050705@tresys.com> <1298391526.16004.8.camel@tesla.lan> <4D6D4FBA.5040005@tresys.com> <1299012069.14035.36.camel@tesla.lan> <4D6E5523.7040001@tresys.com> <1299163002.19257.15.camel@tesla.lan> Message-ID: <4D6FB48B.9080003@redhat.com> To: refpolicy@oss.tresys.com List-Id: refpolicy.oss.tresys.com -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 03/03/2011 09:36 AM, Guido Trentalancia wrote: > On Wed, 02/03/2011 at 09.33 -0500, Christopher J. PeBenito wrote: >> On 03/01/11 15:41, Guido Trentalancia wrote: >>> On Tue, 01/03/2011 at 14.57 -0500, Christopher J. PeBenito wrote: >>>> On 02/22/11 11:18, Guido Trentalancia wrote: >>>>> On Tue, 22/02/2011 at 10.46 -0500, Christopher J. PeBenito wrote: >>>>>> On 02/21/11 15:11, Guido Trentalancia wrote: >>>>>>> On Mon, 21/02/2011 at 10.40 -0500, Daniel J Walsh wrote: >>>>>>>> On 02/20/2011 12:37 AM, Guido Trentalancia wrote: >>>>>> I don't understand why system-config-firewall would need to write to >>>>>> etc_t, the iptables rules have their own labeling: >>>>>> >>>>>> /etc/sysconfig/ip6?tables.* -- >>>>>> gen_context(system_u:object_r:iptables_conf_t,s0) >>>>>> /etc/sysconfig/system-config-firewall.* -- >>>>>> gen_context(system_u:object_r:iptables_conf_t,s0) >>>>>> >>>>>>> Yes, this is very important. But isn't etc_runtime_t what is needed here >>>>>>> then ? >>>>>> >>>>>> No, the purpose of that type is for generated files such as /.autofsck >>>>>> and /etc/motd. >>>>> >>>>> Well then I think we need to check a few labels: >>>>> >>>>> /etc/smartd\.conf.* -- system_u:object_r:etc_runtime_t:s0 >>>>> /etc/reader\.conf -- system_u:object_r:etc_runtime_t:s0 >>>> >>>> Right, these need to be reevaluated. >>> >>> I suppose you are going to take care of that. >> >> Dan/Miroslav, do you have any thoughts on this? I think these lines and >> the below four lines should be removed. >> >>>>> And there is also other stuff that is not automatically-generated (if >>>>> that is what you meant for "generated"): >>>>> >>>>> /etc/motd -- system_u:object_r:etc_runtime_t:s0 >>>>> /etc/issue -- system_u:object_r:etc_runtime_t:s0 >>>>> /etc/HOSTNAME -- system_u:object_r:etc_runtime_t:s0 >>>>> /etc/issue\.net -- system_u:object_r:etc_runtime_t:s0 >>>> >>>> These can be generated out of init scripts. For example, Fedora used to >>>> generate /etc/issue out of a init script. It doesn't look like they do >>>> that anymore, so perhaps we should reconsider these too >>>> >>>>> All the above mentioned files are configuration files by all means. Not >>>>> that it's an urgent matter, but according to what you just said, then >>>>> etc_runtime_t is possibly misplaced there... >>> >>> Yes, some distributions generate very generic banners with the name of >>> the distribution and the version. But they are just meant to be examples >>> (similarly to generic configuration files installed by default in /etc >>> by most packages). >>> >>> They are static, so etc_t is what we need here. > > I also take the opportunity to remind you of the issue with mtab lock > files that I had already mentioned a few days ago. > > Basically, mount tries to create lock files named: > > /etc/mtab~ > > where gets substituted with the process id of mount itself. > > Unfortunately at the moment these files are currently falling back to > the etc_t label. It is very much desirable to have them labeled > etc_runtime_t to avoid problems (denials) with write operations. > > Originally the name for those lock files was /etc/mtab~. To avoid race > conditions it was decided to append the . The source code is > designed so that the upper bound for the length of is 20. > > Please note that contrary to what is stated in the source code for mount > (fstab.c) there is no dot between "/etc/mtab~" and "" (it's not > "/etc/mtab~.") ! > > Can somebody please take care of this ? > > Regards, > > Guido > > _______________________________________________ > refpolicy mailing list > refpolicy at oss.tresys.com > http://oss.tresys.com/mailman/listinfo/refpolicy Well one nice thing in F15 /etc/mtab is going away. ls -l /etc/mtab lrwxrwxrwx. 1 root root 12 Mar 1 08:15 /etc/mtab -> /proc/mounts -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAk1vtIsACgkQrlYvE4MpobNivwCgpW04FPOkyO3AiuqHH040qgGR x8AAnjU6Xxp7u2f2ii2RgFUeezdEHGX7 =G4SU -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----