Bug 1809085 - the ejabberd service triggers an SELinux denial
Summary: the ejabberd service triggers an SELinux denial
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED EOL
Alias: None
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: ejabberd
Version: 32
Hardware: x86_64
OS: Linux
medium
medium
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Peter Lemenkov
QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2020-03-02 12:15 UTC by Milos Malik
Modified: 2021-05-25 18:14 UTC (History)
4 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2021-05-25 18:14:47 UTC
Type: Bug
Embargoed:


Attachments (Terms of Use)

Description Milos Malik 2020-03-02 12:15:39 UTC
Description of problem:
 * the ejabberd service starts successfully but SELinux denial is triggered

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
ejabberd-19.09.1-2.fc32.noarch
ejabberd-selinux-19.09.1-2.fc32.noarch
selinux-policy-3.14.5-28.fc32.noarch
selinux-policy-targeted-3.14.5-28.fc32.noarch

How reproducible:
 * always

Steps to Reproduce:
1. get a Fedora 32 machine (targeted policy is active)
2. start the ejabberd service
3. search for SELinux denials

Actual results (enforcing mode):
----
type=PROCTITLE msg=audit(03/02/2020 07:06:25.433:576) : proctitle=/usr/lib64/erlang/erts-10.6.4/bin/beam.smp -K true -P 250000 -- -root /usr/lib64/erlang -progname erl -- -home /var/lib/ejabberd 
type=PATH msg=audit(03/02/2020 07:06:25.433:576) : item=0 name=/etc/ejabberd/inetrc inode=532185 dev=fc:01 mode=file,640 ouid=ejabberd ogid=ejabberd rdev=00:00 obj=system_u:object_r:etc_t:s0 nametype=NORMAL cap_fp=none cap_fi=none cap_fe=0 cap_fver=0 cap_frootid=0 
type=CWD msg=audit(03/02/2020 07:06:25.433:576) : cwd=/var/lib/ejabberd 
type=SYSCALL msg=audit(03/02/2020 07:06:25.433:576) : arch=x86_64 syscall=access success=no exit=EACCES(Permission denied) a0=0x7ff5b77b0748 a1=W_OK a2=0x81ed9 a3=0xffffffff items=1 ppid=1 pid=15663 auid=unset uid=ejabberd gid=ejabberd euid=ejabberd suid=ejabberd fsuid=ejabberd egid=ejabberd sgid=ejabberd fsgid=ejabberd tty=(none) ses=unset comm=7_dirty_io_sche exe=/usr/lib64/erlang/erts-10.6.4/bin/beam.smp subj=system_u:system_r:ejabberd_t:s0 key=(null) 
type=AVC msg=audit(03/02/2020 07:06:25.433:576) : avc:  denied  { write } for  pid=15663 comm=7_dirty_io_sche name=inetrc dev="vda1" ino=532185 scontext=system_u:system_r:ejabberd_t:s0 tcontext=system_u:object_r:etc_t:s0 tclass=file permissive=0 
----

Expected results:
 * no SELinux denials

Comment 1 Milos Malik 2020-03-02 12:23:41 UTC
The only SELinux denial caught in permissive mode:
----
type=PROCTITLE msg=audit(03/02/2020 07:22:37.364:581) : proctitle=/usr/lib64/erlang/erts-10.6.4/bin/beam.smp -K true -P 250000 -- -root /usr/lib64/erlang -progname erl -- -home /var/lib/ejabberd 
type=PATH msg=audit(03/02/2020 07:22:37.364:581) : item=0 name=/etc/ejabberd/inetrc inode=532185 dev=fc:01 mode=file,640 ouid=ejabberd ogid=ejabberd rdev=00:00 obj=system_u:object_r:etc_t:s0 nametype=NORMAL cap_fp=none cap_fi=none cap_fe=0 cap_fver=0 cap_frootid=0 
type=CWD msg=audit(03/02/2020 07:22:37.364:581) : cwd=/var/lib/ejabberd 
type=SYSCALL msg=audit(03/02/2020 07:22:37.364:581) : arch=x86_64 syscall=access success=no exit=EROFS(Read-only file system) a0=0x7f063dfa87e0 a1=W_OK a2=0x81ed9 a3=0xffffffff items=1 ppid=15767 pid=15778 auid=unset uid=ejabberd gid=ejabberd euid=ejabberd suid=ejabberd fsuid=ejabberd egid=ejabberd sgid=ejabberd fsgid=ejabberd tty=(none) ses=unset comm=10_dirty_io_sch exe=/usr/lib64/erlang/erts-10.6.4/bin/beam.smp subj=system_u:system_r:ejabberd_t:s0 key=(null) 
type=AVC msg=audit(03/02/2020 07:22:37.364:581) : avc:  denied  { write } for  pid=15778 comm=10_dirty_io_sch name=inetrc dev="vda1" ino=532185 scontext=system_u:system_r:ejabberd_t:s0 tcontext=system_u:object_r:etc_t:s0 tclass=file permissive=1 
----

Comment 2 Milos Malik 2020-03-02 12:27:38 UTC
# find /etc/ -inum 532185
/etc/ejabberd/inetrc
#

Comment 3 Milos Malik 2020-03-04 08:39:29 UTC
I believe that writing to a configuration file is not a good idea. Dontaudit candidate?

Comment 4 Fedora Program Management 2021-04-29 17:16:00 UTC
This message is a reminder that Fedora 32 is nearing its end of life.
Fedora will stop maintaining and issuing updates for Fedora 32 on 2021-05-25.
It is Fedora's policy to close all bug reports from releases that are no longer
maintained. At that time this bug will be closed as EOL if it remains open with a
Fedora 'version' of '32'.

Package Maintainer: If you wish for this bug to remain open because you
plan to fix it in a currently maintained version, simply change the 'version' 
to a later Fedora version.

Thank you for reporting this issue and we are sorry that we were not 
able to fix it before Fedora 32 is end of life. If you would still like 
to see this bug fixed and are able to reproduce it against a later version 
of Fedora, you are encouraged  change the 'version' to a later Fedora 
version prior this bug is closed as described in the policy above.

Although we aim to fix as many bugs as possible during every release's 
lifetime, sometimes those efforts are overtaken by events. Often a 
more recent Fedora release includes newer upstream software that fixes 
bugs or makes them obsolete.

Comment 5 Ben Cotton 2021-05-25 18:14:47 UTC
Fedora 32 changed to end-of-life (EOL) status on 2021-05-25. Fedora 32 is
no longer maintained, which means that it will not receive any further
security or bug fix updates. As a result we are closing this bug.

If you can reproduce this bug against a currently maintained version of
Fedora please feel free to reopen this bug against that version. If you
are unable to reopen this bug, please file a new report against the
current release. If you experience problems, please add a comment to this
bug.

Thank you for reporting this bug and we are sorry it could not be fixed.


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