[SSSD] [PATCH] SELINUX: Set permissive umask for selinux operations

Roland Mainz rmainz at redhat.com
Tue Jan 27 16:07:01 UTC 2015



----- Original Message -----
> From: "Roland Mainz" <rmainz at redhat.com>
> To: "Development of the System Security Services Daemon" <sssd-devel at lists.fedorahosted.org>
> Sent: Tuesday, January 27, 2015 4:41:28 PM
> Subject: Re: [SSSD] [PATCH] SELINUX: Set permissive umask for selinux operations
> 
> 
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Jakub Hrozek" <jhrozek at redhat.com>
> > To: sssd-devel at lists.fedorahosted.org
> > Sent: Tuesday, January 27, 2015 11:31:58 AM
> > Subject: Re: [SSSD] [PATCH] SELINUX: Set permissive umask for selinux
> > operations
> > 
> > On Tue, Jan 27, 2015 at 10:51:24AM +0100, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> > > Alternatively, we could only set and reset the umask in the caller. That
> > > way, we would know that a short-lived selinux_child is changing umask.
> > > 
> > > That is safer, but risks that we forget next time..so at least we need
> > > to add a comment to the declaration in header.
> > 
> > Attached is an alternate patch that only touches the umask in the
> > short-lived process.
> 
> Which syscall exactly (strace dump, please) causes the original issue ? Maybe
> there is a way to do this without having to rely on |umask()| (using the
> |*at()| APIs or a later modification of the permissions) ...

I discussed this with jhrozek on IRC... basically libsemanage should fix the permissions after the |mkdir()| call like the mkdir(1) code in https://searchcode.com/codesearch/view/5481405/ line 160 ... but until they we have to stick with the |umask()| workaround (and praying that sssd never uses threads).

----

Bye,
Roland

-- 
  __ .  . __
 (o.\ \/ /.o) rmainz at redhat.com
  \__\/\/__/  IPA/Kerberos5 team
  /O /==\ O\  
 (;O/ \/ \O;)
 



More information about the sssd-devel mailing list