Bug 2178950

Summary:	setroubleshootd can fail when SELinux is disabled
Product:	Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8	Reporter:	Renaud Métrich <rmetrich>
Component:	setroubleshoot	Assignee:	Vit Mojzis <vmojzis>
Status:	CLOSED MIGRATED	QA Contact:	BaseOS QE Security Team <qe-baseos-security>
Severity:	medium	Docs Contact:
Priority:	medium
Version:	8.7	CC:	casl, lvrabec, mmalik, plautrba, vmojzis
Target Milestone:	rc	Keywords:	MigratedToJIRA, Triaged
Target Release:	---	Flags:	pm-rhel: mirror+
Hardware:	All
OS:	Linux
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version:		Doc Type:	If docs needed, set a value
Doc Text:		Story Points:	---
Clone Of:		Environment:
Last Closed:	2023-09-19 17:46:59 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:

Description Renaud Métrich 2023-03-16 09:23:25 UTC

Description of problem:

When SELinux is disabled (either in /etc/selinux/config or on kernel command line "selinux=0"), it's still possible for setroubleshootd service to start, which leads to a failure:
-------- 8< ---------------- 8< ---------------- 8< ---------------- 8< --------
Mar 16 10:11:21 vm-rhel8 systemd[1]: Starting SETroubleshoot daemon for processing new SELinux denial logs...
Mar 16 10:11:22 vm-rhel8 setroubleshoot[2046]: SELinux not enabled, setroubleshootd exiting...
Mar 16 10:11:22 vm-rhel8 systemd[1]: setroubleshootd.service: Main process exited, code=exited, status=3/NOTIMPLEMENT>
Mar 16 10:11:22 vm-rhel8 systemd[1]: setroubleshootd.service: Failed with result 'exit-code'.
Mar 16 10:11:22 vm-rhel8 systemd[1]: Failed to start SETroubleshoot daemon for processing new SELinux denial logs.
-------- 8< ---------------- 8< ---------------- 8< ---------------- 8< --------

Especially, this happens in two cases:

1. if the user starts the service through command line

   # systemctl start setroubleshootd

2. when "sealert" is started, e.g. by insights-client

   # sealert -l "*"

I think we need to harden the service to avoid these two cases.
For this, I'm proposing to add the following stanzas:
-------- 8< ---------------- 8< ---------------- 8< ---------------- 8< --------
ConditionSecurity=selinux
RefuseManualStart=yes
-------- 8< ---------------- 8< ---------------- 8< ---------------- 8< --------

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

setroubleshoot-server-3.3.26-5.el8.x86_64

How reproducible:

Always

Steps to Reproduce:
1. Boot with "selinux=0"
2. Trigger startup using `sealert -l "*"` command

Actual results:

Failure

Expected results:

No failure

Additional info:

Additionally it would be nice to avoid `sealert` from falling in timeout when setroubleshootd cannot start (e.g. because ConditionSecurity=selinux was added).
For now it waits too long before failing:
-------- 8< ---------------- 8< ---------------- 8< ---------------- 8< --------
# sealert -l "*"
... 25 seconds later ...
Unable to establish connection to setroubleshoot daemon!
Check output of 'journalctl -t setroubleshoot' for more details.
-------- 8< ---------------- 8< ---------------- 8< ---------------- 8< --------

Comment 6 RHEL Program Management 2023-09-19 17:41:55 UTC

Issue migration from Bugzilla to Jira is in process at this time. This will be the last message in Jira copied from the Bugzilla bug.

Comment 7 RHEL Program Management 2023-09-19 17:46:59 UTC

This BZ has been automatically migrated to the issues.redhat.com Red Hat Issue Tracker. All future work related to this report will be managed there.

Due to differences in account names between systems, some fields were not replicated.  Be sure to add yourself to Jira issue's "Watchers" field to continue receiving updates and add others to the "Need Info From" field to continue requesting information.

To find the migrated issue, look in the "Links" section for a direct link to the new issue location. The issue key will have an icon of 2 footprints next to it, and begin with "RHEL-" followed by an integer.  You can also find this issue by visiting https://issues.redhat.com/issues/?jql= and searching the "Bugzilla Bug" field for this BZ's number, e.g. a search like:

"Bugzilla Bug" = 1234567

In the event you have trouble locating or viewing this issue, you can file an issue by sending mail to rh-issues. You can also visit https://access.redhat.com/articles/7032570 for general account information.