On Wed, Aug 23, 2023 at 03:59:39PM +0200, Stefano Brivio wrote:
> On Wed, 23 Aug 2023 14:53:27 +0100
> "Richard W.M. Jones" <rjo...@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Aug 23, 2023 at 03:48:44PM +0200, Stefano Brivio wrote:
> > > The hard link trick didn't actually fix the issue with SELinux file
> > > contexts properly: as opposed to symbolic links, SELinux now
> > > correctly associates types to the labels that are set -- except that
> > > those labels are now shared, so we can end up (depending on how
> > > rpm(8) extracts the archives) with /usr/bin/passt having a
> > > pasta_exec_t context.
> > >
> > > This got rather confusing as running restorecon(8) seemed to fix up
> > > labels -- but that's simply toggling between passt_exec_t and
> > > pasta_exec_t for both links, because each invocation will just "fix"
> > > the file with the mismatching context.
> > >
> > > Replace the hard links with copies. AppArmor's attachment, instead,
> > > works with hard links, and if there's no LSM, we can keep symbolic
> > > links, so keep symbolic links in the Makefile.
> > >
> > > With copies, rpmbuild(8) will warn about duplicate Build-IDs in the
> > > same package. Mangle them in pasta binaries by summing one to the
> > > last byte, modulo one byte, using xxd (provided by vim-common) and
> > > disable the automatic rehashing by find-debuginfo(1) -- we already
> > > have per-release Build-IDs thanks to $VERSION passed on 'make'.
> >
> > Right, this ^ was going to be my comment. RPM doesn't like having two
> > identical copies of a file.
>
> In which other way, though? cpio(1) is fine with it, and I tried to
> install the package on both ext4 and xfs -- the only warning I got was
> the (semi-reasonable) one from rpmbuild about duplicate Build-IDs.
I'm fairly sure I've seen an error when you have two identical files;
it might only happen in Koji. Anyway, hacking the binary is surely
wrong, but let's hear the opinions of the Fedora / SELinux developers.
Rich.
> > Hacking the binary to "fix" the problem doesn't sound like a solution.
> >
> > I'm CC-ing Fedora-devel-list to find out we can properly fix this issue.
> >
> > Rich.
> >
> > > Signed-off-by: Stefano Brivio <sbri...@redhat.com>
> > > ---
> > > contrib/fedora/passt.spec | 27 ++++++++++++++++++++++-----
> > > 1 file changed, 22 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/contrib/fedora/passt.spec b/contrib/fedora/passt.spec
> > > index d0c6895..51bf5a8 100644
> > > --- a/contrib/fedora/passt.spec
> > > +++ b/contrib/fedora/passt.spec
> > > @@ -9,6 +9,10 @@
> > >
> > > %global git_hash {{{ git_head }}}
> > > %global selinuxtype targeted
> > > +# Different Build-IDs for passt and pasta: don't let find-debuginfo
> > > touch them
> > > +%undefine _unique_build_ids
> > > +%global _no_recompute_build_ids 1
> > > +
> > >
> > > Name: passt
> > > Version: {{{ git_version }}}
> > > @@ -19,7 +23,7 @@ Group: System Environment/Daemons
> > > URL: https://passt.top/
> > > Source:
> > > https://passt.top/passt/snapshot/passt-%{git_hash}.tar.xz
> > >
> > > -BuildRequires: gcc, make, checkpolicy, selinux-policy-devel
> > > +BuildRequires: gcc, make, checkpolicy, selinux-policy-devel, binutils,
> > > vim-common
> > > Requires: (%{name}-selinux = %{version}-%{release} if
> > > selinux-policy-%{selinuxtype})
> > >
> > > %description
> > > @@ -56,15 +60,28 @@ This package adds SELinux enforcement to passt(1) and
> > > pasta(1).
> > > %install
> > >
> > > %make_install DESTDIR=%{buildroot} prefix=%{_prefix} bindir=%{_bindir}
> > > mandir=%{_mandir} docdir=%{_docdir}/%{name}
> > > -# The Makefile creates symbolic links for pasta, but we need hard links
> > > for
> > > +# The Makefile creates symbolic links for pasta, but we need actual
> > > copies for
> > > # SELinux file contexts to work as intended. Same with pasta.avx2 if
> > > present.
> > > -ln -f %{buildroot}%{_bindir}/passt %{buildroot}%{_bindir}/pasta
> > > +#
> > > +# To avoid duplicate Build-IDs in the same package, we increase the last
> > > byte of
> > > +# the value for pasta binaries by one (modulo one byte). Note that we
> > > already
> > > +# have differentiated Build-IDs per release, courtesy of $VERSION, so we
> > > don't
> > > +# need find-debuginfo(1) to recalculate them.
> > > +rm %{buildroot}%{_bindir}/pasta
> > > +objcopy --dump-section .note.gnu.build-id=%{buildroot}/build_id
> > > %{buildroot}%{_bindir}/passt
> > > +printf '\x'$(printf %02x $(( ( 0x$(xxd -ps -s 35 %{buildroot}/build_id)
> > > + 1 ) % 0xff )) ) | dd of=%{buildroot}/build_id seek=35 bs=1 count=1
> > > conv=notrunc
> > > +objcopy --update-section .note.gnu.build-id=%{buildroot}/build_id
> > > %{buildroot}%{_bindir}/passt %{buildroot}%{_bindir}/pasta
> > > +rm %{buildroot}/build_id
> > > +
> > > %ifarch x86_64
> > > -ln -f %{buildroot}%{_bindir}/passt.avx2 %{buildroot}%{_bindir}/pasta.avx2
> > > +rm %{buildroot}%{_bindir}/pasta.avx2
> > > +objcopy --dump-section .note.gnu.build-id=%{buildroot}/build_id
> > > %{buildroot}%{_bindir}/passt.avx2
> > > +printf '\x'$(printf %02x $(( ( 0x$(xxd -ps -s 35 %{buildroot}/build_id)
> > > + 1 ) % 0xff )) ) | dd of=%{buildroot}/build_id seek=35 bs=1 count=1
> > > conv=notrunc
> > > +objcopy --update-section .note.gnu.build-id=%{buildroot}/build_id
> > > %{buildroot}%{_bindir}/passt.avx2 %{buildroot}%{_bindir}/pasta.avx2
> > > +rm %{buildroot}/build_id
> > >
> > > ln -sr %{buildroot}%{_mandir}/man1/passt.1
> > > %{buildroot}%{_mandir}/man1/passt.avx2.1
> > > ln -sr %{buildroot}%{_mandir}/man1/pasta.1
> > > %{buildroot}%{_mandir}/man1/pasta.avx2.1
> > > -install -p -m 755 %{buildroot}%{_bindir}/passt.avx2
> > > %{buildroot}%{_bindir}/pasta.avx2
> > > %endif
> > >
> > > pushd contrib/selinux
> > > --
> > > 2.39.2
>
> --
> Stefano
--
Richard Jones, Virtualization Group, Red Hat http://people.redhat.com/~rjones
Read my programming and virtualization blog: http://rwmj.wordpress.com
virt-builder quickly builds VMs from scratch
http://libguestfs.org/virt-builder.1.html
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it:
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
