lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2010]   [Aug]   [30]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: selinux vs devtmpfs (vs udev)
From
Date
On Sat, 2010-08-28 at 11:57 +0200, Kay Sievers wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 28, 2010 at 01:00, Eric Paris <eparis@redhat.com> wrote:

> > In the new new days of devtmpfs things aren't as nice. The kernel is
> > magically creating files in /dev. These are getting created with the
> > 'default' SELinux context. So herein lies the problem.
> >
> > The first program that tries to access these files get denied by
> > SELinux. Now udev actually has logic in it to fix the label on any
> > closed device file, so udev will at that point swoop in, fix the label,
> > and the next program that tries to use the file will work just fine. Oh
> > fun!

> Udev should still label all device nodes, even when they are created
> by the kernel. Devtmpfs or not should not make a difference here.
>
> I guess it's a udev bug introduced with:
> http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/hotplug/udev.git;a=commitdiff;h=578cc8a8085a47c963b5940459e475ac5f07219c
>
> and we just need to fix that.

Looks like the likely cause. I see a note in one of the bugzillas that
says:

Aug 30 14:03:09 pippin udevd-work[347]: preserve file '/dev/dri/card0',
because it has correct dev_t

Which is certainly the part of code in question. Do you have a quick
fix in mind that you plan to push upstream or should I ask the RH udev
guy to come up with something?

-Eric



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2010-08-31 01:19    [from the cache]
©2003-2014 Jasper Spaans. Advertise on this site