[redhat-lspp] labeled ipsec status

[Paul Moore]

On Monday, January 8 2007 3:31 pm, Eric Paris wrote:
> > 3. Toggle to accept or reject unlabeled packets.
> > Dan has completed this. He added a boolean, allow_unlabeled_packets,
> > to selinux policy. Currently, because of a problem in lspp60
> > kernel, boolean does not work. I tested the boolean on
> > upstream kernel from kernel.org, 2.6.20-rc3-git4 and the boolean
> > worked great and as expected. (See #5 below as to why
> > it did not work in lspp60.)
>
> can paul make sure this works for NetLabel as well (since 5 shouldn't be
> applicable to NetLabel)?

I'll verify that this still works on lspp.60 but I have no reason to believe 
it wouldn't.  The way NetLabel allows/denies non-NetLabel packets is 
different from IPsec.

When SELinux receives a packet it queries NetLabel to see if there are any 
NetLabel related security attributes attached to the packet; there are three 
possible results from this query:

1. security attributes are present - query function returns success populates 
a structure with the NetLabel security attributes

2. security attributes are not present and the unlabeled flag is set to 
allow - query function returns success and the security attribute structure 
is cleared

3. security attributes are not present and the unlabeled flag is set to deny - 
query function returns failure

We can go into all the pros/cons of such an approach vs a granular policy 
approach if you would like but when I lost the argument to use 
SECINITSID_NETMSG as the default NetLabel packet type we lost the ability to 
distinguish between NetLabel'd and non-NetLabel'd packets in SELinux policy 
(NetLabel uses SECINITSID_UNLABELED/unlabeled_t for incoming traffic).

-- 
paul moore
linux security @ hp