Hi Darrel,
I didn't notice this patch in my inbox until just recently. I've put
a few comments inline.
On Fri, Feb 24, 2006 at 04:26:13PM -0600, Darrel Goeddel wrote:
diff --git a/kernel/auditfilter.c b/kernel/auditfilter.c
index 3712295..752e2bb 100644
--- a/kernel/auditfilter.c
+++ b/kernel/auditfilter.c
@@ -25,6 +25,7 @@
#include <linux/fs.h>
#include <linux/namei.h>
#include <linux/netlink.h>
+#include <linux/selinux.h>
#include "audit.h"
/* There are three lists of rules -- one to search at task creation
@@ -50,6 +51,13 @@ static inline void audit_free_watch(stru
static inline void audit_free_rule(struct audit_entry *e)
{
+ int i;
+ if (e->rule.fields)
+ for (i = 0; i < e->rule.field_count; i++) {
+ struct audit_field *f = &e->rule.fields[i];
+ kfree(f->se_str);
+ selinux_audit_rule_free(f->se_rule);
+ }
kfree(e->rule.fields);
kfree(e);
}
@@ -192,7 +200,12 @@ static struct audit_entry *audit_rule_to
f->val = rule->values[i];
if (f->type & AUDIT_UNUSED_BITS ||
- f->type == AUDIT_WATCH) {
+ f->type == AUDIT_WATCH ||
+ f->type == AUDIT_SE_USER ||
+ f->type == AUDIT_SE_ROLE ||
+ f->type == AUDIT_SE_TYPE ||
+ f->type == AUDIT_SE_SEN ||
+ f->type == AUDIT_SE_CLR) {
err = -EINVAL;
goto exit_free;
}
@@ -222,7 +235,7 @@ static struct audit_entry *audit_data_to
void *bufp;
size_t remain = datasz - sizeof(struct audit_rule_data);
int i;
- char *path;
+ char *str;
entry = audit_to_entry_common((struct audit_rule *)data);
if (IS_ERR(entry))
@@ -241,16 +254,42 @@ static struct audit_entry *audit_data_to
f->op = data->fieldflags[i] & AUDIT_OPERATORS;
f->type = data->fields[i];
f->val = data->values[i];
+ f->se_str = NULL;
+ f->se_rule = NULL;
switch(f->type) {
+ case AUDIT_SE_USER:
+ case AUDIT_SE_ROLE:
+ case AUDIT_SE_TYPE:
+ case AUDIT_SE_SEN:
+ case AUDIT_SE_CLR:
+ str = audit_unpack_string(&bufp, &remain, f->val);
+ if (IS_ERR(str))
+ goto exit_free;
+ entry->rule.buflen += f->val;
+
+ err = selinux_audit_rule_init(f->type, f->op, str,
+ &f->se_rule);
+ /* Keep currently invalid fields around in case they
+ become valid after a policy reload. */
+ if (err == -EINVAL) {
+ printk(KERN_WARNING "selinux audit rule for
item %s is invalid\n", str);
+ err = 0;
+ }
+ if (err) {
+ kfree(str);
+ goto exit_free;
+ } else
+ f->se_str = str;
+ break;
case AUDIT_WATCH:
- path = audit_unpack_string(&bufp, &remain, f->val);
- if (IS_ERR(path))
+ str = audit_unpack_string(&bufp, &remain, f->val);
+ if (IS_ERR(str))
goto exit_free;
entry->rule.buflen += f->val;
- err = audit_to_watch(path, &entry->rule, i);
+ err = audit_to_watch(str, &entry->rule, i);
if (err) {
- kfree(path);
+ kfree(str);
goto exit_free;
}
break;
@@ -333,6 +372,14 @@ static struct audit_rule_data *audit_kru
data->buflen += data->values[i] =
audit_pack_string(&bufp, krule->watch->path);
break;
+ case AUDIT_SE_USER:
+ case AUDIT_SE_ROLE:
+ case AUDIT_SE_TYPE:
+ case AUDIT_SE_SEN:
+ case AUDIT_SE_CLR:
+ data->buflen += data->values[i] =
+ audit_pack_string(&bufp, f->se_str);
+ break;
default:
data->values[i] = f->val;
}
@@ -370,6 +417,14 @@ static int audit_compare_rule(struct aud
if (audit_compare_watch(a->watch, b->watch))
return 1;
break;
+ case AUDIT_SE_USER:
+ case AUDIT_SE_ROLE:
+ case AUDIT_SE_TYPE:
+ case AUDIT_SE_SEN:
+ case AUDIT_SE_CLR:
+ if (strcmp(a->fields[i].se_str, b->fields[i].se_str))
+ return 1;
+ break;
default:
if (a->fields[i].val != b->fields[i].val)
return 1;
@@ -640,6 +695,9 @@ int audit_comparator(const u32 left, con
default:
return -EINVAL;
}
+ /* should NEVER get here */
+ BUG();
+ return 0;
}
@@ -726,3 +784,143 @@ unlock_and_return:
rcu_read_unlock();
return result;
}
+
+/* Check to see if the rule contains any selinux fields. Returns 1 if
there
+ are selinux fields specified in the rule, 0 otherwise. */
+static inline int audit_rule_has_selinux(struct audit_krule *rule)
+{
+ int i;
+
+ for (i = 0; i < rule->field_count; i++) {
+ struct audit_field *f = &rule->fields[i];
+ switch (f->type) {
+ case AUDIT_SE_USER:
+ case AUDIT_SE_ROLE:
+ case AUDIT_SE_TYPE:
+ case AUDIT_SE_SEN:
+ case AUDIT_SE_CLR:
+ return 1;
+ }
+ }
+
+ return 0;
+}
+
+/* Make a copy of src in dest. This will be a deep copy with the exception
+ of the watch - that pointer is carried over. The selinux specific
fields
+ will be updated in the copy. The point is to be able to replace the src
+ rule with the dest rule in the list, then free the dest rule. */
+static inline int selinux_audit_rule_update_helper(struct audit_krule
*dest,
+ struct audit_krule *src)
+{
+ int i, err = 0;
+
+ dest->vers_ops = src->vers_ops;
+ dest->flags = src->flags;
+ dest->listnr = src->listnr;
+ dest->action = src->action;
+ for (i = 0; i < AUDIT_BITMASK_SIZE; i++)
+ dest->mask[i] = src->mask[i];
+ dest->buflen = src->buflen;
+ dest->field_count = src->field_count;
+
+ /* deep copy this information, updating the se_rule fields, because
+ the originals will all be freed when the old rule is freed. */
+ dest->fields = kzalloc(sizeof(struct audit_field) *
dest->field_count,
+ GFP_ATOMIC);
+ if (!dest->fields)
+ return -ENOMEM;
It seems like it would be cleaner to group the memory allocations for
the rule entry and the fields into a single function, as any audit
rule must always have both. This would allow you to retain the
assumption of the existence of fields in audit_free_rule.
+ memcpy(dest->fields, src->fields,
+ sizeof(struct audit_field) * dest->field_count);
+ for (i = 0; i < dest->field_count; i++) {
+ struct audit_field *df = &dest->fields[i];
+ struct audit_field *sf = &src->fields[i];
+ switch (df->type) {
+ case AUDIT_SE_USER:
+ case AUDIT_SE_ROLE:
+ case AUDIT_SE_TYPE:
+ case AUDIT_SE_SEN:
+ case AUDIT_SE_CLR:
+ /* our own copy of se_str */
+ df->se_str = kstrdup(sf->se_str, GFP_ATOMIC);
I realize failure is unlikely here, but shouldn't you check the return
value? Later on you'll end up passing this to strcmp() which won't
like it if it's NULL.
+ /* our own (refreshed) copy of se_rule */
+ err = selinux_audit_rule_init(df->type, df->op,
+ df->se_str,
&df->se_rule);
+ /* Keep currently invalid fields around in case they
+ become valid after a policy reload. */
+ if (err == -EINVAL) {
+ printk(KERN_WARNING "selinux audit rule for
item %s is invalid\n", df->se_str);
+ err = 0;
+ }
+ if (err)
+ return err;
+ }
+ }
+
+ /* we can shallow copy the watch because we will not be freeing it
via
+ selinux_audit_rule_update (and we do nto modify it) */
On the flipside, when audit watches are updated, the se_str and
se_rule will need to be deep copied since they are freed in
audit_free_rule(). Is this what you intend?
+ dest->watch = src->watch;
+ dest->rlist = src->rlist;
+
+ return 0;
+}
+
+/* This function will re-initialize the se_rule field of all applicable
rules.
+ It will traverse the filter lists serarching for rules that contain
selinux
+ specific filter fields. When such a rule is found, it is copied, the
+ selinux field is re-initialized, and the old rule is replaced with the
+ updated rule. */
+/* XXX: is the error handling below appropriate */
+static int selinux_audit_rule_update(void)
+{
+ struct audit_entry *entry, *nentry;
+ int i, err = 0, tmperr;
+
+ /* audit_netlink_sem synchronizes the writers */
+ down(&audit_netlink_sem);
+
+ for (i = 0; i < AUDIT_NR_FILTERS; i++) {
+ list_for_each_entry(entry, &audit_filter_list[i], list) {
+ if (!audit_rule_has_selinux(&entry->rule))
+ continue;
+
+ nentry = kmalloc(sizeof(*entry), GFP_ATOMIC);
+ if (!nentry) {
+ /* save the first error encountered for the
+ return value */
+ if (!err)
+ err = -ENOMEM;
+ audit_panic("error updating selinux
filters");
+ continue;
+ }
+
+ tmperr =
selinux_audit_rule_update_helper(&nentry->rule,
+
&entry->rule);
+ if (!nentry) {
How would we end up with !nentry here? Maybe you mean if (temperr) ?
+ /* save the first error encountered for the
+ return value */
+ if (!err)
+ err = -ENOMEM;
You don't want to hardcode the -ENOMEM as selinux_audit_rule_init()
can also return an error.
+ audit_free_rule(nentry);
+ audit_panic("error updating selinux
filters");
+ continue;
+ }
+ list_replace_rcu(&entry->list, &nentry->list);
+ call_rcu(&entry->rcu, audit_free_rule_rcu);
+ }
+ }
+
+ up(&audit_netlink_sem);
+
+ return err;
+}
+
+/* Register the callback with selinux. This callback will be invoked when
a
+ new policy is loaded. */
+static int __init register_selinux_update_callback(void)
+{
+ selinux_audit_set_callback(&selinux_audit_rule_update);
+ return 0;
+}
+__initcall(register_selinux_update_callback);
+
I don't know about anyone else, but I would prefer to keep all of the
initialization for the audit subsystem in audit.c:audit_init(). This
makes the audit initialization path more easily synchronized and
readable.
Regards,
Amy