From: Richard Guy Briggs <[email protected]>
To: Paul Moore <[email protected]>
Cc: Linux-Audit Mailing List <[email protected]>,
LKML <[email protected]>,
[email protected], Eric Paris <[email protected]>,
Steve Grubb <[email protected]>, Stefan Roesch <[email protected]>,
Christian Brauner <[email protected]>,
Jens Axboe <[email protected]>,
Pavel Begunkov <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 2/2] io_uring,audit: do not log IORING_OP_*GETXATTR
Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2023 19:19:31 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Y9RqEz/[email protected]> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAHC9VhSN+XSYGh0TBsCPftNvVNBN1JHugrrsp3gbF-in5S1PoA@mail.gmail.com>
On 2023-01-27 19:06, Paul Moore wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 27, 2023 at 6:01 PM Richard Guy Briggs <[email protected]> wrote:
> > On 2023-01-27 17:43, Paul Moore wrote:
> > > On Fri, Jan 27, 2023 at 12:24 PM Richard Guy Briggs <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > > Getting XATTRs is not particularly interesting security-wise.
> > > >
> > > > Suggested-by: Steve Grubb <[email protected]>
> > > > Fixes: a56834e0fafe ("io_uring: add fgetxattr and getxattr support")
> > > > Signed-off-by: Richard Guy Briggs <[email protected]>
> > > > ---
> > > > io_uring/opdef.c | 2 ++
> > > > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
> > >
> > > Depending on your security policy, fetching file data, including
> > > xattrs, can be interesting from a security perspective. As an
> > > example, look at the SELinux file/getattr permission.
> > >
> > > https://github.com/SELinuxProject/selinux-notebook/blob/main/src/object_classes_permissions.md#common-file-permissions
> >
> > The intent here is to lessen the impact of audit operations. Read and
> > Write were explicitly removed from io_uring auditing due to performance
> > concerns coupled with the denial of service implications from sheer
> > volume of records making other messages harder to locate. Those
> > operations are still possible for syscall auditing but they are strongly
> > discouraged for normal use.
>
> We need to balance security needs and performance needs. You are
> correct that general read() and write() operations are not audited,
> and generally not checked from a LSM perspective as the auditing and
> access control happens at open() time instead (access to fds is
> revalidated when they are passed). However, in the case of getxattr
> and fgetxattr, these are not normal file read operations, and do not
> go through the same code path in the kernel; there is a reason why we
> have xattr_permission() and security_inode_getxattr().
>
> We need to continue to audit IORING_OP_FGETXATTR and IORING_OP_GETXATTR.
Fair enough. This would be similar reasoning to send/recv vs
sendmsg/recvmsg. I'll drop this patch. Thanks for the reasoning and
feedback.
> paul-moore.com
- RGB
--
Richard Guy Briggs <[email protected]>
Sr. S/W Engineer, Kernel Security, Base Operating Systems
Remote, Ottawa, Red Hat Canada
IRC: rgb, SunRaycer
Voice: +1.647.777.2635, Internal: (81) 32635
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-01-28 0:22 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 32+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-01-27 17:23 [PATCH v1 0/2] two suggested iouring op audit updates Richard Guy Briggs
2023-01-27 17:23 ` [PATCH v1 1/2] io_uring,audit: audit IORING_OP_FADVISE but not IORING_OP_MADVISE Richard Guy Briggs
2023-01-27 22:35 ` Paul Moore
2023-01-27 22:45 ` Jens Axboe
2023-01-27 22:57 ` Paul Moore
2023-01-28 16:48 ` Steve Grubb
2023-01-27 23:02 ` Richard Guy Briggs
2023-01-27 23:03 ` Jens Axboe
2023-01-27 23:08 ` Richard Guy Briggs
2023-01-27 22:55 ` Richard Guy Briggs
2023-01-27 23:05 ` Paul Moore
2023-01-27 17:23 ` [PATCH v1 2/2] io_uring,audit: do not log IORING_OP_*GETXATTR Richard Guy Briggs
2023-01-27 22:43 ` Paul Moore
2023-01-27 23:01 ` Richard Guy Briggs
2023-01-27 23:05 ` Jens Axboe
2023-01-28 0:07 ` Paul Moore
2023-01-28 0:06 ` Paul Moore
2023-01-28 0:19 ` Richard Guy Briggs [this message]
2023-01-28 17:26 ` Steve Grubb
2023-01-29 23:37 ` Paul Moore
2023-01-27 17:40 ` [PATCH v1 0/2] two suggested iouring op audit updates Jens Axboe
2023-01-27 19:42 ` Paul Moore
2023-01-27 19:43 ` Jens Axboe
2023-01-27 22:38 ` Paul Moore
2023-01-27 22:46 ` Jens Axboe
2023-01-27 22:53 ` Paul Moore
2023-01-27 23:02 ` Jens Axboe
2023-01-27 23:07 ` Richard Guy Briggs
2023-01-27 23:08 ` Paul Moore
2023-01-27 23:10 ` Jens Axboe
2023-01-28 16:47 ` Steve Grubb
2023-01-28 17:03 ` Paul Moore
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=Y9RqEz/[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox