Bug 1749870
Summary: | SELinux is preventing pcp-pmda-named from executing /usr/sbin/rndc | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | Red Hat Enterprise Linux 7 | Reporter: | Jan Kurik <jkurik> |
Component: | pcp | Assignee: | Nathan Scott <nathans> |
Status: | CLOSED ERRATA | QA Contact: | Jan Kurik <jkurik> |
Severity: | unspecified | Docs Contact: | |
Priority: | unspecified | ||
Version: | 7.8 | CC: | agerstmayr, jkurik, lmiksik, mgoodwin, nathans, patrickm |
Target Milestone: | rc | Keywords: | Bugfix, Triaged |
Target Release: | 7.9 | ||
Hardware: | All | ||
OS: | Unspecified | ||
Whiteboard: | |||
Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | No Doc Update | |
Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
Last Closed: | 2020-09-29 19:24:55 UTC | Type: | Bug |
Regression: | --- | Mount Type: | --- |
Documentation: | --- | CRM: | |
Verified Versions: | Category: | --- | |
oVirt Team: | --- | RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host: | |
Cloudforms Team: | --- | Target Upstream Version: | |
Embargoed: | |||
Bug Depends On: | |||
Bug Blocks: | 1782202 |
Description
Jan Kurik
2019-09-06 15:46:48 UTC
Hmm, strange - the policy patch definitely has these changes... $ grep ndc_exec_t * selinux-policy.patch:+ allow [pcp_pmcd_t] [ndc_exec_t] : [file] { execute }; selinux-policy.patch:+ type ndc_exec_t; selinux-policy.patch:+allow pcp_pmcd_t ndc_exec_t:file execute; Bit of a mystery - is the AVC exactly the same as before Jan? Thanks. You are right Nathan, it is a different AVC. I am sorry for the confusion. The AVC it is throwing now is: # grep 'type=AVC ' /var/log/audit/audit.log | head -n 1 type=AVC msg=audit(1586150510.119:1454): avc: denied { execute_no_trans } for pid=30473 comm="perl" path="/usr/sbin/rndc" dev="vda1" ino=7449669 scontext=system_u:system_r:pcp_pmcd_t:s0 tcontext=system_u:object_r:ndc_exec_t:s0 tclass=file permissive=0 # audit2allow -a #============= pcp_pmcd_t ============== allow pcp_pmcd_t ndc_exec_t:file execute_no_trans; When I apply this ^^^ selinux rule, the test is then passing. Should I open a new bug for this ? > Should I open a new bug for this ?
Yes please Jan. Since its relatively low priority and readily worked around, let's aim for 7.10 for that one, unless there's some other need for a 7.9 rebuild.
Since the problem described in this bug report should be resolved in a recent advisory, it has been closed with a resolution of ERRATA. For information on the advisory (Low: pcp security, bug fix, and enhancement update), and where to find the updated files, follow the link below. If the solution does not work for you, open a new bug report. https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2020:3869 |