Ping On Wed, Aug 25, 2021 at 02:35:04PM -0500, Eric Blake wrote: > On Fri, Jul 23, 2021 at 05:38:06PM +0100, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote: > > On Fri, Jul 23, 2021 at 06:18:55PM +0200, Kevin Wolf wrote: > > > Am 23.07.2021 um 12:33 hat Richard W.M. Jones geschrieben: > > > > Under SELinux, Unix domain sockets have two labels. One is on the > > > > disk and can be set with commands such as chcon(1). There is a > > > > different label stored in memory (called the process label). This can > > > > only be set by the process creating the socket. When using SELinux + > > > > SVirt and wanting qemu to be able to connect to a qemu-nbd instance, > > > > you must set both labels correctly first. > > > > > > > > For qemu-nbd the options to set the second label are awkward. You can > > > > create the socket in a wrapper program and then exec into qemu-nbd. > > > > Or you could try something with LD_PRELOAD. > > > > > > > > This commit adds the ability to set the label straightforwardly on the > > > > command line, via the new --selinux-label flag. (The name of the flag > > > > is the same as the equivalent nbdkit option.) > > > > > > > > A worked example showing how to use the new option can be found in > > > > this bug: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1984938 > > > > > > > > Fixes: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1984938 > > > > Signed-off-by: Richard W.M. Jones <rjo...@redhat.com> > > > > > > I suppose this would also be relevant for the built-in NBD server, > > > especially in the context of qemu-storage-daemon? > > > > It depends on the usage scenario really. nbdkit / qemu-nbd are > > not commonly run under any SELinux policy, so then end up being > > unconfined_t. A QEMU NBD client can't connect to an unconfined_t > > socket, so we need to override it with this arg. > > > > In the case of qemu system emulator, under libvirt, it will > > already have a svirt_t type, so in that case there is no need > > to override the type for the socket. > > > > For qsd there's not really any strong practice established > > but i expect most current usage is unconfined_t too and > > would benefit from setting label. > > > > > If so, is this something specific to NBD sockets, or would it actually > > > make sense to have it as a generic option in UnixSocketAddress? > > > > It is applicable to inet sockets too in fact. > > So now that 6.2 is open, should I queue the patch as is, or wait for a > v3 that makes the option more generic to all socket usage? >
-- Eric Blake, Principal Software Engineer Red Hat, Inc. +1-919-301-3266 Virtualization: qemu.org | libvirt.org