1========================================================
2Linux Security Modules: General Security Hooks for Linux
3========================================================
4
5:Author: Stephen Smalley
6:Author: Timothy Fraser
7:Author: Chris Vance
8
9.. note::
10
11   The APIs described in this book are outdated.
12
13Introduction
14============
15
16In March 2001, the National Security Agency (NSA) gave a presentation
17about Security-Enhanced Linux (SELinux) at the 2.5 Linux Kernel Summit.
18SELinux is an implementation of flexible and fine-grained
19nondiscretionary access controls in the Linux kernel, originally
20implemented as its own particular kernel patch. Several other security
21projects (e.g. RSBAC, Medusa) have also developed flexible access
22control architectures for the Linux kernel, and various projects have
23developed particular access control models for Linux (e.g. LIDS, DTE,
24SubDomain). Each project has developed and maintained its own kernel
25patch to support its security needs.
26
27In response to the NSA presentation, Linus Torvalds made a set of
28remarks that described a security framework he would be willing to
29consider for inclusion in the mainstream Linux kernel. He described a
30general framework that would provide a set of security hooks to control
31operations on kernel objects and a set of opaque security fields in
32kernel data structures for maintaining security attributes. This
33framework could then be used by loadable kernel modules to implement any
34desired model of security. Linus also suggested the possibility of
35migrating the Linux capabilities code into such a module.
36
37The Linux Security Modules (LSM) project was started by WireX to develop
38such a framework. LSM is a joint development effort by several security
39projects, including Immunix, SELinux, SGI and Janus, and several
40individuals, including Greg Kroah-Hartman and James Morris, to develop a
41Linux kernel patch that implements this framework. The patch is
42currently tracking the 2.4 series and is targeted for integration into
43the 2.5 development series. This technical report provides an overview
44of the framework and the example capabilities security module provided
45by the LSM kernel patch.
46
47LSM Framework
48=============
49
50The LSM kernel patch provides a general kernel framework to support
51security modules. In particular, the LSM framework is primarily focused
52on supporting access control modules, although future development is
53likely to address other security needs such as auditing. By itself, the
54framework does not provide any additional security; it merely provides
55the infrastructure to support security modules. The LSM kernel patch
56also moves most of the capabilities logic into an optional security
57module, with the system defaulting to the traditional superuser logic.
58This capabilities module is discussed further in
59`LSM Capabilities Module <#cap>`__.
60
61The LSM kernel patch adds security fields to kernel data structures and
62inserts calls to hook functions at critical points in the kernel code to
63manage the security fields and to perform access control. It also adds
64functions for registering and unregistering security modules, and adds a
65general :c:func:`security()` system call to support new system calls
66for security-aware applications.
67
68The LSM security fields are simply ``void*`` pointers. For process and
69program execution security information, security fields were added to
70:c:type:`struct task_struct <task_struct>` and
71:c:type:`struct linux_binprm <linux_binprm>`. For filesystem
72security information, a security field was added to :c:type:`struct
73super_block <super_block>`. For pipe, file, and socket security
74information, security fields were added to :c:type:`struct inode
75<inode>` and :c:type:`struct file <file>`. For packet and
76network device security information, security fields were added to
77:c:type:`struct sk_buff <sk_buff>` and :c:type:`struct
78net_device <net_device>`. For System V IPC security information,
79security fields were added to :c:type:`struct kern_ipc_perm
80<kern_ipc_perm>` and :c:type:`struct msg_msg
81<msg_msg>`; additionally, the definitions for :c:type:`struct
82msg_msg <msg_msg>`, struct msg_queue, and struct shmid_kernel
83were moved to header files (``include/linux/msg.h`` and
84``include/linux/shm.h`` as appropriate) to allow the security modules to
85use these definitions.
86
87Each LSM hook is a function pointer in a global table, security_ops.
88This table is a :c:type:`struct security_operations
89<security_operations>` structure as defined by
90``include/linux/security.h``. Detailed documentation for each hook is
91included in this header file. At present, this structure consists of a
92collection of substructures that group related hooks based on the kernel
93object (e.g. task, inode, file, sk_buff, etc) as well as some top-level
94hook function pointers for system operations. This structure is likely
95to be flattened in the future for performance. The placement of the hook
96calls in the kernel code is described by the "called:" lines in the
97per-hook documentation in the header file. The hook calls can also be
98easily found in the kernel code by looking for the string
99"security_ops->".
100
101Linus mentioned per-process security hooks in his original remarks as a
102possible alternative to global security hooks. However, if LSM were to
103start from the perspective of per-process hooks, then the base framework
104would have to deal with how to handle operations that involve multiple
105processes (e.g. kill), since each process might have its own hook for
106controlling the operation. This would require a general mechanism for
107composing hooks in the base framework. Additionally, LSM would still
108need global hooks for operations that have no process context (e.g.
109network input operations). Consequently, LSM provides global security
110hooks, but a security module is free to implement per-process hooks
111(where that makes sense) by storing a security_ops table in each
112process' security field and then invoking these per-process hooks from
113the global hooks. The problem of composition is thus deferred to the
114module.
115
116The global security_ops table is initialized to a set of hook functions
117provided by a dummy security module that provides traditional superuser
118logic. A :c:func:`register_security()` function (in
119``security/security.c``) is provided to allow a security module to set
120security_ops to refer to its own hook functions, and an
121:c:func:`unregister_security()` function is provided to revert
122security_ops to the dummy module hooks. This mechanism is used to set
123the primary security module, which is responsible for making the final
124decision for each hook.
125
126LSM also provides a simple mechanism for stacking additional security
127modules with the primary security module. It defines
128:c:func:`register_security()` and
129:c:func:`unregister_security()` hooks in the :c:type:`struct
130security_operations <security_operations>` structure and
131provides :c:func:`mod_reg_security()` and
132:c:func:`mod_unreg_security()` functions that invoke these hooks
133after performing some sanity checking. A security module can call these
134functions in order to stack with other modules. However, the actual
135details of how this stacking is handled are deferred to the module,
136which can implement these hooks in any way it wishes (including always
137returning an error if it does not wish to support stacking). In this
138manner, LSM again defers the problem of composition to the module.
139
140Although the LSM hooks are organized into substructures based on kernel
141object, all of the hooks can be viewed as falling into two major
142categories: hooks that are used to manage the security fields and hooks
143that are used to perform access control. Examples of the first category
144of hooks include the :c:func:`alloc_security()` and
145:c:func:`free_security()` hooks defined for each kernel data
146structure that has a security field. These hooks are used to allocate
147and free security structures for kernel objects. The first category of
148hooks also includes hooks that set information in the security field
149after allocation, such as the :c:func:`post_lookup()` hook in
150:c:type:`struct inode_security_ops <inode_security_ops>`.
151This hook is used to set security information for inodes after
152successful lookup operations. An example of the second category of hooks
153is the :c:func:`permission()` hook in :c:type:`struct
154inode_security_ops <inode_security_ops>`. This hook checks
155permission when accessing an inode.
156
157LSM Capabilities Module
158=======================
159
160The LSM kernel patch moves most of the existing POSIX.1e capabilities
161logic into an optional security module stored in the file
162``security/capability.c``. This change allows users who do not want to
163use capabilities to omit this code entirely from their kernel, instead
164using the dummy module for traditional superuser logic or any other
165module that they desire. This change also allows the developers of the
166capabilities logic to maintain and enhance their code more freely,
167without needing to integrate patches back into the base kernel.
168
169In addition to moving the capabilities logic, the LSM kernel patch could
170move the capability-related fields from the kernel data structures into
171the new security fields managed by the security modules. However, at
172present, the LSM kernel patch leaves the capability fields in the kernel
173data structures. In his original remarks, Linus suggested that this
174might be preferable so that other security modules can be easily stacked
175with the capabilities module without needing to chain multiple security
176structures on the security field. It also avoids imposing extra overhead
177on the capabilities module to manage the security fields. However, the
178LSM framework could certainly support such a move if it is determined to
179be desirable, with only a few additional changes described below.
180
181At present, the capabilities logic for computing process capabilities on
182:c:func:`execve()` and :c:func:`set\*uid()`, checking
183capabilities for a particular process, saving and checking capabilities
184for netlink messages, and handling the :c:func:`capget()` and
185:c:func:`capset()` system calls have been moved into the
186capabilities module. There are still a few locations in the base kernel
187where capability-related fields are directly examined or modified, but
188the current version of the LSM patch does allow a security module to
189completely replace the assignment and testing of capabilities. These few
190locations would need to be changed if the capability-related fields were
191moved into the security field. The following is a list of known
192locations that still perform such direct examination or modification of
193capability-related fields:
194
195-  ``fs/open.c``::c:func:`sys_access()`
196
197-  ``fs/lockd/host.c``::c:func:`nlm_bind_host()`
198
199-  ``fs/nfsd/auth.c``::c:func:`nfsd_setuser()`
200
201-  ``fs/proc/array.c``::c:func:`task_cap()`
202