Re: [AppArmor 01/41] Pass struct vfsmount to the inode_create LSM hook

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On May 26, 2007, at 19:08:56, Toshiharu Harada wrote:
2007/5/27, James Morris <[email protected]>:
On Sat, 26 May 2007, Kyle Moffett wrote:
AppArmor). On the other hand, if you actually want to protect the _data_, then tagging the _name_ is flawed; tag the *DATA* instead.

Bingo.

(This is how traditional Unix DAC has always functioned, and is what SELinux does: object labeling).

Object labeling (or labeled security) looks simple and straight forward way, but it's not.

(1) Object labeling has a assumption that labels are always properly defined and maintained. This can not be easily achieved.

That's a circular argument, and a fairly trivial one at that. If you can't properly manage your labels, then how do you expect any security at all? If you can't manage your "labels", then pathname- based security won't work either. This is analogous to saying "Pathname-based security has an assumption that path-permissions are always properly defined and maintained", which is equally obvious. If you can't achieve the first with reasonable security, then you probably can't achieve the second either. Also, if you can't manage correct object labeling then I'm very interested in how you are maintaining secure Linux systems without standard DAC.

(2) Also, assigning a label is something like inventing and assigning a *new* name (label name) to objects which can cause flaws.

I don't understand how assigning new attributes to objects "can cause flaws", nor what flaws those might be; could you elaborate further? In particular, I don't see how this is really all that more complicated than defining additional access control in apache .htaccess files. The principle is the same: by stacking multiple independent security-verification mechanisms (Classical UNIX DAC and Apache permissions) you can increase security, albeit at an increased management cost. You might also note that ".htaccess" files are yet another form of successful "label-based" security; the security context for a directory depends on the .htaccess "label" file found within. The *exact* same principles apply to SELinux: you add additional attributes backed by a simple and powerful state- machine. The cross-checks are lower-level than those from .htaccess files, but the principles are the same.

Cheers,
Kyle Moffett



-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Photo]     [Stuff]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Linux for the blind]     [Linux Resources]
  Powered by Linux