Bug 2134829

Summary: AVC Denial on iptables / ip6tables on Centos Stream 9
Product: Red Hat Enterprise Linux 9 Reporter: Jed Lejosne <jlejosne>
Component: selinux-policyAssignee: Nikola Knazekova <nknazeko>
Status: CLOSED ERRATA QA Contact: Milos Malik <mmalik>
Severity: high Docs Contact:
Priority: medium    
Version: CentOS StreamCC: bstinson, dwalsh, extras-qa, grepl.miroslav, jwboyer, lpivarc, lvrabec, mmalik, omosnace, rocketraman, vmojzis, zpytela
Target Milestone: rcKeywords: Triaged
Target Release: 9.2   
Hardware: Unspecified   
OS: Linux   
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version: selinux-policy-34.1.46-1.el9 Doc Type: No Doc Update
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of: 2008097 Environment:
Last Closed: 2023-05-09 08:16:52 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: 2008097    
Bug Blocks: 2134820    

Description Jed Lejosne 2022-10-14 13:20:21 UTC
+++ This bug was initially created as a clone of Bug #2008097 +++

Description of problem:

[ 1591.423033] audit: type=1400 audit(1632734301.322:867): avc:  denied  { ioctl } for  pid=11021 comm="iptables" path="/sys/fs/cgroup" dev="tmpfs" ino=1 scontext=system_u:system_r:iptables_t:s0 tcontext=system_u:object_r:cgroup_t:s0 tclass=dir permissive=0
[ 1591.628670] audit: type=1400 audit(1632734301.528:868): avc:  denied  { ioctl } for  pid=11022 comm="ip6tables" path="/sys/fs/cgroup" dev="tmpfs" ino=1 scontext=system_u:system_r:iptables_t:s0 tcontext=system_u:object_r:cgroup_t:s0 tclass=dir permissive=0
[ 1651.420826] audit: type=1400 audit(1632734361.322:874): avc:  denied  { ioctl } for  pid=11084 comm="iptables" path="/sys/fs/cgroup" dev="tmpfs" ino=1 scontext=system_u:system_r:iptables_t:s0 tcontext=system_u:object_r:cgroup_t:s0 tclass=dir permissive=0
[ 1651.626716] audit: type=1400 audit(1632734361.528:875): avc:  denied  { ioctl } for  pid=11085 comm="ip6tables" path="/sys/fs/cgroup" dev="tmpfs" ino=1 scontext=system_u:system_r:iptables_t:s0 tcontext=system_u:object_r:cgroup_t:s0 tclass=dir permissive=0
[ 1711.418951] audit: type=1400 audit(1632734421.323:882): avc:  denied  { ioctl } for  pid=11137 comm="iptables" path="/sys/fs/cgroup" dev="tmpfs" ino=1 scontext=system_u:system_r:iptables_t:s0 tcontext=system_u:object_r:cgroup_t:s0 tclass=dir permissive=0
[ 1711.624370] audit: type=1400 audit(1632734421.528:883): avc:  denied  { ioctl } for  pid=11139 comm="ip6tables" path="/sys/fs/cgroup" dev="tmpfs" ino=1 scontext=system_u:system_r:iptables_t:s0 tcontext=system_u:object_r:cgroup_t:s0 tclass=dir permissive=0
[ 1771.416286] audit: type=1400 audit(1632734481.322:890): avc:  denied  { ioctl } for  pid=11188 comm="iptables" path="/sys/fs/cgroup" dev="tmpfs" ino=1 scontext=system_u:system_r:iptables_t:s0 tcontext=system_u:object_r:cgroup_t:s0 tclass=dir permissive=0
[ 1771.622655] audit: type=1400 audit(1632734481.528:891): avc:  denied  { ioctl } for  pid=11190 comm="ip6tables" path="/sys/fs/cgroup" dev="tmpfs" ino=1 scontext=system_u:system_r:iptables_t:s0 tcontext=system_u:object_r:cgroup_t:s0 tclass=dir permissive=0
[ 1831.413986] audit: type=1400 audit(1632734541.322:899): avc:  denied  { ioctl } for  pid=11239 comm="iptables" path="/sys/fs/cgroup" dev="tmpfs" ino=1 scontext=system_u:system_r:iptables_t:s0 tcontext=system_u:object_r:cgroup_t:s0 tclass=dir permissive=0
[ 1831.619931] audit: type=1400 audit(1632734541.528:900): avc:  denied  { ioctl } for  pid=11241 comm="ip6tables" path="/sys/fs/cgroup" dev="tmpfs" ino=1 scontext=system_u:system_r:iptables_t:s0 tcontext=system_u:object_r:cgroup_t:s0 tclass=dir permissive=0

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):

Centos Stream 9

--- Additional comment from Sandro Bonazzola on 2021-09-27 12:47:59 UTC ---

workaround:

# echo '(allow iptables_t cgroup_t (dir (ioctl)))' >local_iptables.cil
# semodule -i local_iptables.cil

--- Additional comment from Zdenek Pytela on 2021-09-29 18:57:50 UTC ---

Hi Sandro,

Are ther some steps necessary to trigger these denials? Apart from the denials, do you also see some problem in the functionality?

--- Additional comment from Sandro Bonazzola on 2021-09-30 14:51:36 UTC ---

(In reply to Zdenek Pytela from comment #2)
> Hi Sandro,
> 
> Are ther some steps necessary to trigger these denials? Apart from the
> denials, do you also see some problem in the functionality?

I installed latest Fedora CoreOS 34 stable passing ignition from OKD 4.8 series at https://amd64.origin.releases.ci.openshift.org/#4.8.0-0.okd .

The denials is raised after the system reboots.

It keeps showing up in the logs until you apply the workaround so I believe this means that the operation which is blocked by the denial is required to complete the installation successfully.

--- Additional comment from Zdenek Pytela on 2021-11-05 17:00:22 UTC ---

Sandro,

Will you be able to get additional details about the denial, without the workaround in place?

To enable full auditing:
1) Open the /etc/audit/rules.d/audit.rules file in an editor.
2) Remove the following line if it exists:
-a task,never
3) Add the following line to the end of the file:
-w /etc/shadow -p w
4) Restart the audit daemon:
  # service auditd restart
5) Re-run your scenario.
6) Collect AVC denials:
  # ausearch -i -m avc,user_avc,selinux_err,user_selinux_err -ts today

--- Additional comment from Sandro Bonazzola on 2021-12-02 13:31:51 UTC ---

# ausearch
-bash: ausearch: command not found


looks like ausearch is not included in Fedora CoreOS 34.

--- Additional comment from Zdenek Pytela on 2021-12-02 14:07:34 UTC ---

OK, please answer a few questions then:
1. Is the workaround in #c1 sufficient?
2. Without the workaround in place, did you see any problems with functionality of some service?
3. Besides the data in #c0, are there any further information regarding the denials either in journal or dmesg?

--- Additional comment from Sandro Bonazzola on 2022-02-16 13:15:42 UTC ---

(In reply to Zdenek Pytela from comment #6)
> OK, please answer a few questions then:
> 1. Is the workaround in #c1 sufficient?

Yes the workaround was enough to get the deployment working

> 2. Without the workaround in place, did you see any problems with
> functionality of some service?

Yes, OKD installation got stuck until the selinux denial was solved

> 3. Besides the data in #c0, are there any further information regarding the
> denials either in journal or dmesg?

I couldn't see anything more in the logs on the OS level. I didn't dig into the various pods / service logs.

--- Additional comment from Zdenek Pytela on 2022-02-16 16:42:46 UTC ---

I've submitted a Fedora PR to address the issue:
https://github.com/fedora-selinux/selinux-policy/pull/1083

--- Additional comment from Zdenek Pytela on 2022-03-14 13:31:13 UTC ---



--- Additional comment from Fedora Update System on 2022-04-12 09:13:07 UTC ---

FEDORA-2022-eaef082697 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 34. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-eaef082697

--- Additional comment from Fedora Update System on 2022-04-13 16:10:18 UTC ---

FEDORA-2022-eaef082697 has been pushed to the Fedora 34 testing repository.
Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command:
`sudo dnf upgrade --enablerepo=updates-testing --advisory=FEDORA-2022-eaef082697`
You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-eaef082697

See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.

--- Additional comment from Fedora Update System on 2022-04-17 23:07:45 UTC ---

FEDORA-2022-eaef082697 has been pushed to the Fedora 34 testing repository.
Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command:
`sudo dnf upgrade --enablerepo=updates-testing --advisory=FEDORA-2022-eaef082697`
You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-eaef082697

See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.

--- Additional comment from Fedora Update System on 2022-05-02 07:30:30 UTC ---

FEDORA-2022-eaef082697 has been pushed to the Fedora 34 stable repository.
If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.

Comment 11 errata-xmlrpc 2023-05-09 08:16:52 UTC
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 (selinux-policy 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/RHBA-2023:2483