Bug 181283 - avc denied messages while sendmail upgrade
Summary: avc denied messages while sendmail upgrade
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED RAWHIDE
Alias: None
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: sendmail
Version: rawhide
Hardware: All
OS: Linux
medium
medium
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Thomas Woerner
QA Contact: David Lawrence
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2006-02-12 18:51 UTC by Robert Scheck
Modified: 2008-08-02 23:40 UTC (History)
0 users

Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2007-01-27 21:02:37 UTC
Type: ---
Embargoed:


Attachments (Terms of Use)

Description Robert Scheck 2006-02-12 18:51:32 UTC
Description of problem:
I got the following avc denied messages during the last sendmail upgrade - but 
I've got also MIMEDefang running, maybe one or another message is caused by
this combination?!

type=AVC msg=audit(1139661606.854:756741): avc:  denied  { dac_override } for  
pid=23207 comm="newaliases" capability=1 scontext=user_u:system_r:system_mail_t:
s0-s0:c0.c255 tcontext=user_u:system_r:system_mail_t:s0-s0:c0.c255 
tclass=capability
type=AVC msg=audit(1139661606.854:756741): avc:  denied  { getattr } for  
pid=23207 comm="newaliases" name="mimedefang.sock" dev=cciss/c0d0p2 ino=2801677 
scontext=user_u:system_r:system_mail_t:s0-s0:c0.c255 tcontext=user_u:object_r:
var_spool_t:s0 tclass=sock_file
type=SYSCALL msg=audit(1139661606.854:756741): arch=40000003 syscall=196 
success=yes exit=0 a0=bf8e0728 a1=bf8e05c0 a2=f67ff4 a3=3 items=1 pid=23207 
auid=500 uid=0 gid=0 euid=0 suid=0 fsuid=0 egid=51 sgid=51 fsgid=51 
comm="newaliases" exe="/usr/sbin/sendmail.sendmail"
type=AVC_PATH msg=audit(1139661606.854:756741):  path="/var/spool/MIMEDefang/
mimedefang.sock"
type=CWD msg=audit(1139661606.854:756741):  cwd="/"
type=PATH msg=audit(1139661606.854:756741): item=0 name="/var/spool/MIMEDefang/
mimedefang.sock" flags=0  inode=2801677 dev=68:02 mode=0140750 ouid=103 ogid=103 
rdev=00:00
type=AVC msg=audit(1139661609.634:756742): avc:  denied  { read } for  pid=23239 
comm="hostname" name="submit.mc" dev=cciss/c0d0p2 ino=721256 scontext=user_u:
system_r:hostname_t:s0-s0:c0.c255 tcontext=system_u:object_r:etc_mail_t:s0 
tclass=file
type=AVC msg=audit(1139661609.634:756742): avc:  denied  { read } for  pid=23239 
comm="hostname" name="cf.m4" dev=cciss/c0d0p2 ino=2736232 scontext=user_u:
system_r:hostname_t:s0-s0:c0.c255 tcontext=system_u:object_r:usr_t:s0 
tclass=file
type=SYSCALL msg=audit(1139661609.634:756742): arch=40000003 syscall=11 
success=yes exit=0 a0=9128d38 a1=9127f88 a2=9128b40 a3=9128208 items=2pid=23239 
auid=500 uid=0 gid=0 euid=0 suid=0 fsuid=0 egid=0 sgid=0 fsgid=0 comm="hostname" 
exe="/bin/hostname"
type=AVC_PATH msg=audit(1139661609.634:756742):  path="/usr/share/sendmail-cf/
m4/cf.m4"
type=AVC_PATH msg=audit(1139661609.634:756742):  path="/etc/mail/submit.mc"
type=CWD msg=audit(1139661609.634:756742):  cwd="/etc/mail"
type=PATH msg=audit(1139661609.634:756742): item=0 name="/bin/hostname" 
flags=101  inode=1261747 dev=68:02 mode=0100755 ouid=0 ogid=0 rdev=00:00
type=PATH msg=audit(1139661609.634:756742): item=1 flags=101  inode=2965544 
dev=68:02 mode=0100755 ouid=0 ogid=0 rdev=00:00

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
selinux-policy-targeted-2.2.11-1

Expected results:
No avc messages ;-)

Comment 1 Daniel Walsh 2006-02-13 15:14:21 UTC
Sendmail is leaking file descriptors to /etc/mail/submit.mc and mimedefang.sock

You need to make sure file descriptors are closed on exec.

Comment 2 Daniel Walsh 2006-02-13 15:18:15 UTC
Should /var/spool/MIMEDefang/ be labeled mail_spool_t?

Comment 3 Thomas Woerner 2006-02-17 16:37:45 UTC
MIMEDefang is not part of sendmail. Are sou sure, that this is a problem of
sendmail and not mimedefang?

Comment 4 Robert Scheck 2006-02-17 16:42:45 UTC
I'm not sure, as I already wrote.

But audit 1139661609.634 looks to be sendmail related, because nothing in my /
etc/mail/submit.mc is directly pointing to MIMEDefang. Or am I wrong?

Nevertheless, maybe there should be a upstream selinux-policy for MIMEDefang? ;)

Comment 5 Florian La Roche 2007-01-23 09:45:00 UTC
Is this fixed with the current devel tree?

Thanks,

Florian La Roche



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