Note: This bug is displayed in read-only format because the product is no longer active in Red Hat Bugzilla.
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 2074325

Summary: Remediation Ansible affected by rpm setperams bug 1900662
Product: Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8 Reporter: Bryan Kinney <bkinney>
Component: scap-security-guideAssignee: Vojtech Polasek <vpolasek>
Status: CLOSED NOTABUG QA Contact: BaseOS QE Security Team <qe-baseos-security>
Severity: high Docs Contact:
Priority: unspecified    
Version: 8.4CC: ggasparb, mhaicman, tlestach, wsato
Target Milestone: rcFlags: pm-rhel: mirror+
Target Release: ---   
Hardware: Unspecified   
OS: Unspecified   
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version: Doc Type: If docs needed, set a value
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of: Environment:
Last Closed: 2022-04-25 09:48:37 UTC Type: Bug
Regression: --- Mount Type: ---
Documentation: --- CRM:
Verified Versions: Category: ---
oVirt Team: --- RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: --- Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:

Description Bryan Kinney 2022-04-12 01:33:55 UTC
Description of problem:
The remediation Ansible script for the "Australian Cyber Security Centre (ACSC) Essential Eight" policy includes the command: rpm --setperms
The permissions for files in the path: /usr/share/crypto-policies/back-ends/
are changed to 777.
This includes all symbolic links and regular files there.
Those permissions are of course picked up by a compliance scan.

There is a known bug (1900662).
The FILEFLAGS for a normal symlink is 0,
but for ghost symlink it is set to 64 which triggers the chmod.


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


How reproducible:


Steps to Reproduce:
1. Check permissions of files in path: /usr/share/crypto-policies/back-ends/
2. Create Remediation Ansible for "Australian Cyber Security Centre (ACSC) Essential Eight"
3. Run script against server(s)
4. Check permissions of files in path: /usr/share/crypto-policies/back-ends/

Actual results:
All symbolic links and regular files permissions are changed to 777.

Expected results:
All permissions should stay at 644.
Maybe a final check in the Ansible script of that path would be an easy fix?

Additional info:
The fix for this has been created but is delayed by other fixes.
The rpm --setperams bugzilla case was started 2 years ago.

Comment 2 Marek Haicman 2022-04-21 17:32:10 UTC
I believe this should be fixed by convincing RPM folks to backport fix described in Bug 1900662

Comment 5 Marek Haicman 2022-04-25 09:48:37 UTC
Hello. As I understand the request, the fix for this in the RPM is tracked and on the way to get released in Bug 1900662

The recommendation in the SCAP content is not wrong. We do not want to introduce workarounds into our security compliance content, due to significant maintenance burden. If you need to backport the RPM fix, please request it in the RPM bugzilla.

Closing as NOTABUG