Skip to content

L
libvirt

openeuler / libvirt

通知 3
Star 0
Fork 0
L
libvirt

体验新版 GitCode，发现更多精彩内容 >>

切换分支/标签
  1. 16 10月, 2019 2 次提交
  3. 15 10月, 2019 36 次提交
  5. 14 10月, 2019 2 次提交
    • M
      security_stack: Perform rollback if one of stacked drivers fails · 9d03e9ad
      由 Michal Privoznik 提交于 
      In order to have multiple security drivers hidden under one
virSecurity* call, we have virSecurityStack driver which holds a
list of registered security drivers and for every virSecurity*
call it iterates over the list and calls corresponding callback
in real security drivers. For instance, for
virSecurityManagerSetAllLabel() it calls
domainSetSecurityAllLabel callback sequentially in NOP, DAC and
(possibly) SELinux or AppArmor drivers. This works just fine if
the callback from every driver returns success. Problem arises
when one of the drivers fails. For instance, aforementioned
SetAllLabel() succeeds for DAC but fails in SELinux in which
case all files that DAC relabelled are now owned by qemu:qemu (or
whomever runs qemu) and thus permissions are leaked. This is even
more visible with XATTRs which remain set for DAC.

The solution is to perform a rollback on failure, i.e. call
opposite action on drivers that succeeded.

I'm providing rollback only for set calls and intentionally
omitting restore calls for two reasons:

1) restore calls are less likely to fail (they merely remove
XATTRs and chown()/setfilecon() file - all of these operations
succeeded in set call),

2) we are not really interested in restore failures - in a very
few places we check for retval of a restore function we do so
only to print a warning.

Resolves: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1740024Signed-off-by: NMichal Privoznik <mprivozn@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: NCole Robinson <crobinso@redhat.com>
      9d03e9ad
    • M
      security_stack: Turn list of nested drivers into a doubly linked list · cd355a52
      由 Michal Privoznik 提交于 
      In near future we will need to walk through the list of internal
drivers in reversed order. The simplest solution is to turn
singly linked list into a doubly linked list.
We will not need to start from the end really, so there's no tail
pointer kept.
Signed-off-by: NMichal Privoznik <mprivozn@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: NCole Robinson <crobinso@redhat.com>
      cd355a52