mirror of
https://passt.top/passt
synced 2024-12-22 13:45:32 +00:00
0af928eaa0
...now it gets ugly. If we use pasta without an existing target namespace, and run commands directly or spawn a shell, and keep the pasta_t domain when we do, they won't be able to do much: a shell might even start, but it's not going to be usable, or to even display a prompt. Ideally, pasta should behave like a shell when it spawns a command: start as unconfined_t and automatically transition to whatever domain is associated in the specific policy for that command. But we can't run as unconfined_t, of course. It would seem natural to switch to unconfined_t "just before", so that the default transitions happen. But transitions can only happen when we execvp(), and that's one single transition -- not two. That is, this approach would work for: pasta -- sh -c 'ip address show' but not for: pasta -- ip address show If we configure a transition to unconfined_t when we run ip(8), we'll really try to start that as unconfined_t -- but unconfined_t isn't allowed as entrypoint for ip(8) itself, and execvp() will fail. However, there aren't many different types of binaries pasta might commonly run -- for example, we're unlikely to see pasta used to run a mount(8) command. Explicitly set up domain transition for common stuff -- switching to unconfined_t for bin_t and shells works just fine, ip(8), ping(8), arping(8) and similar need a different treatment. While at it, allow commands we spawn to inherit resource limits and signal masks, because that's what happens by default, and don't require AT_SECURE sanitisation of the environment (because that won't happen by default). Slightly unrelated: we also need to explicitly allow pasta_t to use TTYs, not just PTYs, otherwise we can't keep stdin and stdout open for shells. Signed-off-by: Stefano Brivio <sbrivio@redhat.com> |
||
|---|---|---|
| .. | ||
| apparmor | ||
| fedora | ||
| kata-containers | ||
| selinux | ||