Tilman Baumann wrote:
quoted text
> Hi all,
>
> i made some SMACK related patches. I hope this list is the right place 
> to post them.

Here and, probably more importantly 
linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org as that's
my primary hang out.

quoted text
> The intention behind this patch is that i needed a way to (firewall) 
> match for packets originating from specific processes.
> The existing owner match did not work well enough, especially since 
> the cmd-owner part is removed.
> Then i thought about a way to tag processes and somehow match this tag 
> in the firewall.
> I recalled that SELinux can do this (SECMARK) but SELinux would have 
> been way to complex for what i want. But the idea was born, i just 
> needed something more simple.
>
> SMACK seemed to be the right way. So i made a little primitive 
> netfilter match to match against the security context of sockets.
> SMACK does CIPSO labels, but this was not what i wanted, i wanted to 
> label the socket not the packet (on the wire).
> This of course only works for packets with a local socket, but this 
> was my intention anyway.
>
> This way i can label a process and all it's sockets carry the same 
> label which i then can use to match against in the firewall.
>

Hmm. It looks as if your code will do what you're asking it to do.
Are you going to be happy with the access restrictions that will be
imposed by Smack?

quoted text
> The code is pretty much based on cargo cult coding from other 
> netfilter matches, especially the owner match (which turned out to be 
> a bad reference since it is crapped with tons of compat interfaces).
>
> I have no kernel coding experience whatsoever and little C coding 
> history. So i would really like you guys to look over it a bit.
>
> Originally i intended to put this mask in the xtables_match structure.
> .hooks = (1 << NF_INET_LOCAL_OUT) | (1 << NF_INET_LOCAL_IN)
> But it turned out that i then could not longer put the rule in a chain 
> which is called by the OUTPUT chain but only in OUTPUT directly.
> I did not investigate much more since i did not really understand this 
> part. Allowing the user to add this match wherever he wants to does 
> not hurt, if there is no local socket there is no matching.
> But maybe this is something that should be changed.
>
> About the Files:
> SMACK-netfilter-socket-label-match.patch
> is a git patch for the current kernel.
>
> iptables-smacklabel.patch
> contains the iptables userspace part (applies to iptables-1.4.1.1)
>
>
> Regards
>  Tilman Baumann

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