From: dac.override@gmail.com (Dominick Grift)
Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2018 18:51:39 +0200
Subject: [refpolicy] map permission in can_exec() but not in
 domain_transition_pattern()
In-Reply-To: <20180719164025.GA26209@julius.enp8s0.d30>
References: <11ce07ad-6001-f686-29be-202c9062730e@redhat.com>
	<20180719164025.GA26209@julius.enp8s0.d30>
Message-ID: <20180719165139.GB26209@julius.enp8s0.d30>
To: refpolicy@oss.tresys.com
List-Id: refpolicy.oss.tresys.com

On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 06:40:25PM +0200, Dominick Grift wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 06:17:46PM +0200, Lukas Vrabec via refpolicy wrote:
> > Hi All,
> > 
> > I found one thing in refpolicy which I don't completely understand.
> > 
> > In "policy/support/misc_patterns.spt" there is definition of
> > "domain_transition_pattern" and this contains line:
> > allow $1 $2:file { getattr open read execute };
> > 
> > There is missing map permission.
> > 
> > However in "policy/support/misc_macros.spt" there is definition of
> > "can_exec" and it contains allow rule:
> > define(`can_exec',`allow $1 $2:file { mmap_exec_file_perms ioctl lock
> > execute_no_trans };')

Sorry can_exec() should just use exec_file_perms which would should be mmap_exec_file_perms + execute_no_trans IMHO

> 
> This should just use mmap_exec_file_perms
> 
> > 
> > There is a mmap_exec_file_perms which contains:
> > define(`mmap_exec_file_perms',`{ getattr open map read execute ioctl }')
> > 
> > Map is present in can_exec().
> > 
> > So for domain transitions we don't allow map permission from calling
> > domain on binary type but in can_exec macro there is map permission.
> > 
> > I think this is a bug and in "domain_transition_pattern" there should be
> > this line:
> > allow $1 $2:file { getattr open read execute map };
> 
> This should just use mmap_exec_file_perms as well
> 
> > 
> > instead of:
> > allow $1 $2:file { getattr open read execute };
> > 
> > Am I right or missing something?
> > 
> > Thanks for help!
> > Lukas.
> 
> permission sets provide a single point of failure and should used as much as possible
> 
> These were overlooked and because of this we now have a good example what the purpose of permission sets and patterns is.
> 
> > 
> > -- 
> > Lukas Vrabec
> > Software Engineer, Security Technologies
> > Red Hat, Inc.
> > 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> > _______________________________________________
> > refpolicy mailing list
> > refpolicy at oss.tresys.com
> > http://oss.tresys.com/mailman/listinfo/refpolicy
> 
> 
> -- 
> Key fingerprint = 5F4D 3CDB D3F8 3652 FBD8  02D5 3B6C 5F1D 2C7B 6B02
> https://sks-keyservers.net/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x3B6C5F1D2C7B6B02
> Dominick Grift



-- 
Key fingerprint = 5F4D 3CDB D3F8 3652 FBD8  02D5 3B6C 5F1D 2C7B 6B02
https://sks-keyservers.net/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x3B6C5F1D2C7B6B02
Dominick Grift
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 659 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://oss.tresys.com/pipermail/refpolicy/attachments/20180719/07a7326f/attachment.bin