RHEL Engineering is moving the tracking of its product development work on RHEL 6 through RHEL 9 to Red Hat Jira (issues.redhat.com). If you're a Red Hat customer, please continue to file support cases via the Red Hat customer portal. If you're not, please head to the "RHEL project" in Red Hat Jira and file new tickets here. Individual Bugzilla bugs in the statuses "NEW", "ASSIGNED", and "POST" are being migrated throughout September 2023. Bugs of Red Hat partners with an assigned Engineering Partner Manager (EPM) are migrated in late September as per pre-agreed dates. Bugs against components "kernel", "kernel-rt", and "kpatch" are only migrated if still in "NEW" or "ASSIGNED". If you cannot log in to RH Jira, please consult article #7032570. That failing, please send an e-mail to the RH Jira admins at rh-issues@redhat.com to troubleshoot your issue as a user management inquiry. The email creates a ServiceNow ticket with Red Hat. Individual Bugzilla bugs that are migrated will be moved to status "CLOSED", resolution "MIGRATED", and set with "MigratedToJIRA" in "Keywords". The link to the successor Jira issue will be found under "Links", have a little "two-footprint" icon next to it, and direct you to the "RHEL project" in Red Hat Jira (issue links are of type "https://issues.redhat.com/browse/RHEL-XXXX", where "X" is a digit). This same link will be available in a blue banner at the top of the page informing you that that bug has been migrated.
Bug 1301854 - dhcpd selinux policy doesn't handle on-commit scripts
Summary: dhcpd selinux policy doesn't handle on-commit scripts
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED ERRATA
Alias: None
Product: Red Hat Enterprise Linux 7
Classification: Red Hat
Component: selinux-policy
Version: 7.2
Hardware: All
OS: Linux
unspecified
medium
Target Milestone: rc
: ---
Assignee: Lukas Vrabec
QA Contact: Eva Mrakova
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks: 1330976 1349044
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2016-01-26 07:42 UTC by Sten Spans
Modified: 2016-11-04 02:41 UTC (History)
11 users (show)

Fixed In Version: selinux-policy-3.13.1-82.el7
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
: 1330976 1349044 (view as bug list)
Environment:
Last Closed: 2016-11-04 02:41:05 UTC
Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:

Attachments (Terms of Use)


Links
System ID Private Priority Status Summary Last Updated
Red Hat Product Errata RHBA-2016:2283 0 normal SHIPPED_LIVE selinux-policy bug fix and enhancement update 2016-11-03 13:36:25 UTC

Description Sten Spans 2016-01-26 07:42:22 UTC 
Description of problem:

The Selinux policy for dhcpd doesn't support on commit scripts.
For more details on on-commit scripts see:

http://jpmens.net/2011/07/06/execute-a-script-when-isc-dhcp-hands-out-a-new-lease/


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

dhcp-4.2.5-42.el7


How reproducible:


Steps to Reproduce:
1. Enable an on-commit script
2. check the audit log
3. there is no step 3

Actual results:

type=AVC msg=audit(1453792866.181:11697): avc:  denied  { execute } for  pid=3174 comm="dhcpd" name="myscript" dev="dm-0" ino=147660 scontext=system_u:system_r:dhcpd_t:s0 tcontext=unconfined_u:object_r:dhcp_etc_t:s0 tclass=file

Expected results:
A valid selinux file context for on commit scripts which allows execution, documented in dhcpd_selinux (8)

Additional info:

The samba reference policy provides a good example of what would be needed for dhcpd.

optional_policy(`
    type samba_unconfined_script_t;
    type samba_unconfined_script_exec_t;
    domain_type(samba_unconfined_script_t)
    domain_entry_file(samba_unconfined_script_t, samba_unconfined_script_exec_t)
    corecmd_shell_entry_type(samba_unconfined_script_t)
    role system_r types samba_unconfined_script_t;

    allow smbd_t samba_unconfined_script_exec_t:dir search_dir_perms;
    allow smbd_t samba_unconfined_script_exec_t:file ioctl;

    unconfined_domain(samba_unconfined_script_t)

    tunable_policy(`samba_run_unconfined',`
        domtrans_pattern(smbd_t, samba_unconfined_script_exec_t, samba_unconfined_script_t)
    ',`
        can_exec(smbd_t, samba_unconfined_script_exec_t)
    ')
')
Comment 2 Milos Malik 2016-01-26 08:44:59 UTC 
What is the usual location for such scripts?
Comment 3 Sten Spans 2016-01-26 09:51:24 UTC 
There doesn't seem to be a default location, a subdir below /etc/dhcp would make sense I guess. I've opted for '/etc/dhcp/scripts' but am happy to change to a better option.
Comment 4 Miroslav Grepl 2016-02-12 06:25:47 UTC 
Let's ask Jiri.
Comment 5 Jiri Popelka 2016-02-12 14:14:57 UTC 
+1 to something below /etc/dhcp/

We already have /etc/dhcp/dhclient.d/ for dhclient-related scripts, so my first thought was /etc/dhcp/dhcpd.d/
But then I realized that the execute() statement can be used not only with dhcpd but with dhclient as well, because the RELNOTES says:
"This permits dhcpd or dhclient to execute a named external program
 with command line arguments specified from other configuration language."

Also as dhclient-script(8) says the additional dhclient-{enter/exit/up/down}-hooks scripts that further extend dhclient-script's functionality should be placed into /etc/dhcp/

So maybe just the /etc/dhcp/ without any additional subdirectory ?
Comment 6 Miroslav Grepl 2016-02-25 16:03:44 UTC 
Scripts should be labeled as bin_t located in /etc/dhcp.

Sten,
did you get AVCs for your case?
Comment 7 Sten Spans 2016-02-26 07:48:17 UTC 
The AVC I got is shown in my initial report:

type=AVC msg=audit(1453792866.181:11697): avc:  denied  { execute } for  pid=3174 comm="dhcpd" name="myscript" dev="dm-0" ino=147660 scontext=system_u:system_r:dhcpd_t:s0 tcontext=unconfined_u:object_r:dhcp_etc_t:s0 tclass=file


However this does show that the file is labelled as dhcp_etc_t, which is the default for /etc/dhcp. When I change the context to bin_t the on-commit script indeed works.

> chcon -t bin_t /etc/dhcp/myscript.py
> ls -aZ /etc/dhcp/myscript.py
-rwxr-xr-x. root root unconfined_u:object_r:bin_t:s0   /etc/dhcp/myscript.py


Is this recommended type for dhcp script documented somewhere? Should it be?
Comment 8 Miroslav Grepl 2016-03-14 07:41:02 UTC 
OK, O overlooked. 

The problem is /etc/dhcp is a directory for config files. It would be great to have subdir for these scripts.

We can define a generic labeling for /etc/dhcp to have bin_t as a default label and have more specific labels for config files. But I don't see it as a good solution.
Comment 9 Jiri Popelka 2016-03-14 11:11:41 UTC 
Then either '/etc/dhcp/scripts' (per comment #3) or '/etc/dhcp/on-commit-scripts'. Sten, which one do you like more ?
Comment 10 Sten Spans 2016-03-15 10:18:25 UTC 
/etc/dhcp/scripts would make the most sense. 

Running scripts is possible for expiry and release as well, so hard-coding "commit" in the directory name doesn't really seem logical.

https://deepthought.isc.org/article/AA-01094/0/Adding-support-for-on-commit-on-expire-and-on-release-statements-in-DHCPv6.html
Comment 11 Miroslav Grepl 2016-04-28 14:10:36 UTC 
(In reply to Sten Spans from comment #10)
> /etc/dhcp/scripts would make the most sense. 
> 
> Running scripts is possible for expiry and release as well, so hard-coding
> "commit" in the directory name doesn't really seem logical.
> 
> https://deepthought.isc.org/article/AA-01094/0/Adding-support-for-on-commit-
> on-expire-and-on-release-statements-in-DHCPv6.html

Ok do you need a bug?
Comment 12 Lukas Vrabec 2016-06-22 11:07:13 UTC 
I'll add bin_t label for /etc/dhcp/scripts. 

Jiri, what is state of this issue from your side? 

Thank you.
Comment 13 Tomáš Hozza 2016-06-22 11:27:29 UTC 
Pavel Simerda is the new owner of DHCP component.
Comment 14 Jiri Popelka 2016-06-22 11:43:11 UTC 
(In reply to Lukas Vrabec from comment #12)
> I'll add bin_t label for /etc/dhcp/scripts. 

OK

> Jiri, what is state of this issue from your side? 

I haven't changed anything in dhcp.
Pavel, I think we should add the /etc/dhcp/scripts/ with just README saying that it's a directory for on-commit scripts.
Comment 15 Lukas Vrabec 2016-06-22 15:10:21 UTC 
I added label for it. From selinux-policy side is issue fixed.
Comment 19 errata-xmlrpc 2016-11-04 02:41:05 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, 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://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHBA-2016-2283.html
Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.