Hi Linus,
[Adding SELinux devs to CC list, please follow to the SELinux point.]
On Tue, Mar 04, 2008 at 09:21:19AM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
The problem occurs when Smack is built-in the kernel but not chosen
to register itself on boot. Smack was not chosen on boot cause either
security=AnotherLSM or security=NonExistentLSM.
In all cases, init_smk_fs() ,which registers smackfs, got called
cause it's an __initcall(init_smack_fs).
This include the cases where smack __was not__ chosen on boot.
Making smackfs mountable when Smack is not registered leads to:
1- an Oops by dereferncing the NULL security pointer: current->security (*)
2- Smackfs code got executed though naturally all the code assumes
that smack is already registered with the security system leading
to several problems.
3- The bogus idea of having a subsystem interface available when the
subsystem itself is not available!
So the global is used in init_smk_fs to not register smackfs if
Smack wasn't enabled on boot.
---- SELinux:
I think the SELinux folks faced the same problem too. In my first
local iteration of the security= parameter patch, I forgot to set
`selinux_disable = 1' if SELinux wasn't chosen on boot.
This led to dozen of SELinux Udev events and also led to selinuxfs
being available even though SELinux hooks _weren't_ registered.
Regards,
(*)
Could not save the oops cause it occured too early, but
it was like this:
__init_call
init_smk_fs(void)
smk_unlbl_ambient(NULL)
/*
* Here: current->security = NULL, cause SMACK initial setup
* was not executed.
*/
smack_to_secid(current->security)
strncmp(.., current->security, ..)
--
"Better to light a candle, than curse the darkness"
Ahmed S. Darwish
Homepage: http://darwish.07.googlepages.com
Blog: http://darwish-07.blogspot.com
--
