Re: Hello world and first question concerning Munin
On Fri, 2008-09-12 at 14:35 +0200, Gabriele Pohl wrote:
Hi all,
my name is Gabriele Pohl. I live in Bonn, Germany
and use Fedora for a few years (starting with
Core 4 and upgraded to 9 some months ago)
I use Munin (http://munin.projects.linpro.no/)
to monitor my computers hardware and services.
After upgrading to Fedora 9 I decided to use SELinux
in mode *enforce* and run into lots of problems
concerning SELinux and Munin-Plugins, that need
high system privileges to access block devices a.s.o.
I would like to solve this issues in a good
manner and therefore subscribed to this list
to ask the experts, how to do it.
Now my first question:
Plugin smart_ is written in Python.
It calls "smartctl" from the smartmontools package
(http://smartmontools.sourceforge.net/) to read the
values of the SMART-Attributes from the harddisks.
To activate the plugin, one has to create a link
within the service directory.
Actually the link looks like this:
lrwxrwxrwx root root unconfined_u:object_r:munin_etc_t:s0 smart_sda
-> /usr/share/munin/plugins/smart_
The plugins file looks like this:
-rwxr-xr-x root root
system_u:object_r:munin_exec_t:s0 /usr/share/munin/plugins/smart_
Executable smartctl looks like this:
-rwxr-xr-x root root
system_u:object_r:fsadm_exec_t:s0 /usr/sbin/smartctl
It needs access to the disks block device /dev/sda
that looks like this:
brw-rw---- root disk system_u:object_r:fixed_disk_device_t:s0 /dev/sda
I have policy type targeted active and
policy module munin 1.4.0 installed.
I get the following raw audit messages, when
calling smart_sda:
host=calex.dipohl.com type=AVC msg=audit(1221221404.542:709): avc:
denied { getattr } for pid=18327 comm="python" path="/dev/sda"
dev=tmpfs
ino=298 scontext=unconfined_u:system_r:munin_t:s0
tcontext=system_u:object_r:fixed_disk_device_t:s0 tclass=blk_file
host=calex.dipohl.com type=SYSCALL msg=audit(1221221404.542:709):
arch=40000003 syscall=195 success=no exit=-13 a0=8fbe278 a1=bfcdf038
a2=3e8ff4 a3=8f481b8 items=0 ppid=18220 pid=18327 auid=500 uid=0 gid=491
euid=0 suid=0 fsuid=0 egid=491 sgid=491 fsgid=491 tty=(none) ses=1
comm="python" exe="/usr/bin/python"
subj=unconfined_u:system_r:munin_t:s0 key=(null)
As the FAQ said, I fed these messages into audit2allow:
audit2allow -M mine < avcs
and get the following mine.te:
-------------------------------
module mine 1.0;
require {
type munin_t;
type fixed_disk_device_t;
class blk_file getattr;
}
require {
type munin_t;
type fixed_disk_device_t;
class blk_file getattr;
}
#============= munin_t ==============
allow munin_t fixed_disk_device_t:blk_file getattr;
-------------------------------
and a mine.pp
Will it be ok to load that into the kernel using
semodule -i mine.pp ?
And why are there two identical *require* structs?
Can / Should I delete one of them?
What shall I do with the message of type "SYSCALL"
if it were wrong to put it into the avcs-File?
Should I make adjustments to the files above
(service-link, plugin-file)
Anything else, that you can advise?
Ideally the munin_t domain itself shouldn't need any access to the raw
device - it should transition into the existing domain for smartd
(fsdaemon_t) upon executing the smartctl program. I don't know offhand
if the existing munin policy module has such a domain transition rule.
However, mere getattr access (i.e. the ability to stat the file) isn't a
big deal, so you could likely grant that one w/o difficulty. What would
be more problematic is allowing read or write access to the raw device.
The duplicate require blocks look like a bug in audit2allow.
--
Stephen Smalley
National Security Agency