Bug 441198
| Summary: | SELinux denial for new formatted USB drive. | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | Caius Chance <K9> | ||||||
| Component: | hal | Assignee: | Ian Kent <ikent> | ||||||
| Status: | CLOSED INSUFFICIENT_DATA | QA Contact: | Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa> | ||||||
| Severity: | low | Docs Contact: | |||||||
| Priority: | low | ||||||||
| Version: | 9 | CC: | jmoyer, jonstanley | ||||||
| Target Milestone: | --- | ||||||||
| Target Release: | --- | ||||||||
| Hardware: | All | ||||||||
| OS: | Linux | ||||||||
| Whiteboard: | |||||||||
| Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | Bug Fix | |||||||
| Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |||||||
| Clone Of: | Environment: | ||||||||
| Last Closed: | 2009-02-16 01:02:16 UTC | Type: | --- | ||||||
| Regression: | --- | Mount Type: | --- | ||||||
| Documentation: | --- | CRM: | |||||||
| Verified Versions: | Category: | --- | |||||||
| oVirt Team: | --- | RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host: | |||||||
| Cloudforms Team: | --- | Target Upstream Version: | |||||||
| Embargoed: | |||||||||
| Attachments: |
|
||||||||
|
Description
Caius Chance
2008-04-07 05:06:31 UTC
Please provide the automount map you have created to access these USB devices and obtain a debug log as described at http://people.redhat.com/jmoyer and post it to the bug. Created attachment 301469 [details]
autofs_stuff as per request.
I didn't use autofs table (auto.master, etc) but it just as the way of automatically mounted by system when USB drive is plugged in. host=castor type=AVC msg=audit(1207544232.188:20): avc: denied { read } for
pid=4077 comm="automount" name="core.2350" dev=sda2 ino=97730
scontext=system_u:system_r:automount_t:s0 tcontext=system_u:object_r:root_t:s0
tclass=file
This looks like automount may have dumped core, and selinux may be preventing it
from finishing that process. I'm not sure why the act of dumping core would
trigger a read, though. Is /core.2350 a valid core file?
What version of autofs are you running? autofs-5.0.3-11.i386.rpm Wasn't Ian saying this bug might be not related to autofs? (In reply to comment #9) > autofs-5.0.3-11.i386.rpm > > Wasn't Ian saying this bug might be not related to autofs? I did say that and I still think the actual problem is with hal. But Jeff trying to find out if autofs SEGVed and why. Is the core above an autofs core? Ian Ahhh, I see we changed the component but left it assigned to Jeff, that's not right. Lets follow through on the core file before passing it on. Ian So sorry if I confused you guysin previous comments. That's seems to be the only core file I got at /. (In reply to comment #12) > So sorry if I confused you guysin previous comments. > > That's seems to be the only core file I got at /. It is an automount core file, what was the date stamp on the original file? 2008-04-07 That is a bit odd since you've got the default configuration and it isn't related to what you're doing with the USB devices. It's a big ask but, if you're system hasn't changed much, could you install the autofs-5.0.3-debuginfo-11 package and do: gdb -c /core.2350 /usr/sbin/automount gdb> thr a a bt and post it here please. Assuming the core is still in /, of course. Ian (In reply to comment #15) > That is a bit odd since you've got the default configuration > and it isn't related to what you're doing with the USB devices. > > It's a big ask but, if you're system hasn't changed much, could > you install the autofs-5.0.3-debuginfo-11 package and do: > > gdb -c /core.2350 /usr/sbin/automount > gdb> thr a a bt > > and post it here please. > Assuming the core is still in /, of course. The point of getting the core was to do this myself, instead of putting that burden on teh reporter. However, I'm not getting very good results, as I don't have a system that matches (different versions of libraries, etc). So, yeah, could you please get us the gdb output, Caius? You can find the debuginfo rpm here: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/packages/autofs/5.0.3/11/i386/autofs-debuginfo-5.0.3-11.i386.rpm Thanks! It isn't any problem for me to test. Will test during this weekend and get back to you. Rgds. Created attachment 302257 [details]
gdb output
Please kindly check and let me know if you want more info. I will keep the core
file for a while.
(In reply to comment #18) > Created an attachment (id=302257) [edit] > gdb output > > Please kindly check and let me know if you want more info. I will keep the core > file for a while. This looks like something that I've started seeing on F-8 the last couple of weeks. I don't see a segfault though but I probably should be. Can you re-test with autofs-5.0.3-12 when it gets to the repository please. Ian If you're interested, the package can be had here as well: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=46454 Changing version to '9' as part of upcoming Fedora 9 GA. More information and reason for this action is here: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/HouseKeeping Reporter, could you please reply to the previous question? If you won't reply in one month, I will have to close this bug as INSUFFICIENT_DATA. Thank you. I am sorry that I had been busy since then and there is no resources for me to collect data. Please kindly drop this bug if there are no similar reports on upstream tracker. Thank you very much. Not in Fedora 10 anymore. Please close this bug. |