Fedora Account System
Red Hat Associate
Red Hat Customer
Description of problem: SELinux is preventing rpmdb from 'connectto' accesses on the unix_stream_socket /var/lib/sss/pipes/nss. ***** Plugin catchall (100. confidence) suggests ************************** Se ci credi rpmdb dovrebbe essere consentito connectto accesso al nss unix_stream_socket per impostazione predefinita. Then si dovrebbe riportare il problema come bug. E' possibile generare un modulo di politica locale per consentire questo accesso. Do consentire questo accesso per ora eseguendo: # ausearch -c 'rpmdb'--raw | audit2allow -M my-$MODULE_NOME # semodule -X 300 -i miei-rpmdb.pp Additional Information: Source Context unconfined_u:unconfined_r:rpmdb_t:s0-s0:c0.c1023 Target Context system_u:system_r:sssd_t:s0 Target Objects /var/lib/sss/pipes/nss [ unix_stream_socket ] Source rpmdb Source Path rpmdb Port <Sconosciuto> Host (removed) Source RPM Packages Target RPM Packages SELinux Policy RPM selinux-policy-targeted-3.14.6-30.fc33.noarch Local Policy RPM selinux-policy-targeted-3.14.6-30.fc33.noarch Selinux Enabled True Policy Type targeted Enforcing Mode Permissive Host Name (removed) Platform Linux (removed) 5.9.8-200.fc33.x86_64 #1 SMP Tue Nov 10 21:58:19 UTC 2020 x86_64 x86_64 Alert Count 1 First Seen 2020-11-22 18:11:39 CET Last Seen 2020-11-22 18:11:39 CET Local ID d991a19b-e508-4483-b1a7-e3b45ec471b2 Raw Audit Messages type=AVC msg=audit(1606065099.545:905): avc: denied { connectto } for pid=17254 comm="rpmdb" path="/var/lib/sss/pipes/nss" scontext=unconfined_u:unconfined_r:rpmdb_t:s0-s0:c0.c1023 tcontext=system_u:system_r:sssd_t:s0 tclass=unix_stream_socket permissive=1 Hash: rpmdb,rpmdb_t,sssd_t,unix_stream_socket,connectto Version-Release number of selected component: selinux-policy-targeted-3.14.6-30.fc33.noarch Additional info: component: selinux-policy reporter: libreport-2.14.0 hashmarkername: setroubleshoot kernel: 5.9.8-200.fc33.x86_64 type: libreport
This SELinux denial is already mentioned in https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1899548#c2
*** Bug 1900386 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
*** Bug 1900388 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
*** Bug 1900389 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
*** Bug 1900390 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
This is the list of requested permisisons from duplicates: allow rpmdb_t sssd_public_t:file map; allow rpmdb_t sssd_public_t:file { getattr open }; allow rpmdb_t sssd_t:unix_stream_socket connectto; allow rpmdb_t sssd_var_lib_t:sock_file write; All of them were gathered in SELinux permissive mode. Have you noticed either an AVC denial or any problem in enforcing mode? Personal note: we would need to use sssd_dontaudit_stream_connect() sssd_dontaudit_read_public_files() and create sssd_dontaudit_map_public_files()
(In reply to Zdenek Pytela from comment #6) > Personal note: we would need to use > sssd_dontaudit_stream_connect() > sssd_dontaudit_read_public_files() > and create > sssd_dontaudit_map_public_files() Why do you want to dontaudit them? The sssd_dontaudit_read_public_files() is currently not used at all, while there are many domains that are granted the read perms to sssd_public_t. It doesn't seem right to break the norm.
> (In reply to Zdenek Pytela from comment #6) > > Personal note: we would need to use > > sssd_dontaudit_stream_connect() > > sssd_dontaudit_read_public_files() > > and create > > sssd_dontaudit_map_public_files() > > Why do you want to dontaudit them? The sssd_dontaudit_read_public_files() is > currently not used at all, while there are many domains that are granted the > read perms to sssd_public_t. It doesn't seem right to break the norm. Panu elaborated on that in https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1461313#c73 But I agree in general we should try to avoid dontaudit rules.
(In reply to Zdenek Pytela from comment #8) > Panu elaborated on that in > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1461313#c73 I see... That's indeed a good reason why it should/could be just dontaudit in this case. Thanks for the clarification!
(In reply to Zdenek Pytela from comment #6) > All of them were gathered in SELinux permissive mode. Have you noticed > either an AVC denial or any problem in enforcing mode? I never use SELinux in enforced mode but, beyond that, I honestly wouldn't even know how to replicate the bug.
This message is a reminder that Fedora 33 is nearing its end of life. Fedora will stop maintaining and issuing updates for Fedora 33 on 2021-11-30. 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 '33'. 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 33 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.
Fedora 33 changed to end-of-life (EOL) status on 2021-11-30. Fedora 33 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.