Bug 1318645 - Missing SeLinux policy [NEEDINFO]
Summary: Missing SeLinux policy
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED DUPLICATE of bug 1291801
Alias: None
Product: Red Hat Enterprise Linux 7
Classification: Red Hat
Component: selinux-policy
Version: 7.3
Hardware: x86_64
OS: Linux
unspecified
low
Target Milestone: rc
: ---
Assignee: Miroslav Grepl
QA Contact: BaseOS QE Security Team
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2016-03-17 12:31 UTC by Florin Asavoaie
Modified: 2016-03-17 16:04 UTC (History)
9 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2016-03-17 15:57:11 UTC
Target Upstream Version:
florin.asavoaie: needinfo?


Attachments (Terms of Use)

Description Florin Asavoaie 2016-03-17 12:31:56 UTC
Description of problem:

mdadm not allowed to search /sys/firmware/efi/efivars/.

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

mdadm-3.3.2-7.el7.x86_64
selinux-policy-targeted-3.13.1-60.el7_2.3.noarch

How reproducible:

In my case, I have a RAID 1 volume with Intel RST, managed by mdadm. When I do "fdisk /dev/md126" and then hit "w" to save changes, even if I did not change anything, I get an Audit alert that mdadm is denied to access /sys/firmware/efi/efivars/.

Was not able to check if it is reproducible with other types of RAID arrays created with mdadm or anything.

Here is the output of audit2allow:

[root@pc ~]# audit2allow -a
#============= mdadm_t ==============
allow mdadm_t efivarfs_t:dir search;

Steps to Reproduce:
1. Check the previous section.

Actual results:

Selinux denies access to mdadm to something that appears to be required.

Expected results:

mdadm is able to access all the hardware and other information it needs.

Additional info:

I am not able to detect what functional issues are caused by this behavior, I only noticed the audit notification.

Comment 2 Jes Sorensen 2016-03-17 14:46:00 UTC
This is an selinux-policy problem rather than mdadm - reassigning to the
correct package.

Jes

Comment 4 Lukas Vrabec 2016-03-17 15:57:11 UTC
Milos is right.

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 1291801 ***

Comment 5 Florin Asavoaie 2016-03-17 16:04:27 UTC
Guys, I don't seem to be able to access that bug. What is its status please?


Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.