hi,
I tried to do as Halen suggested, but now my java app (which run as
service) isn't starting.
in the log I have this error:
installd: invalid apk path '*/path/to/my/apk*' (bad prefix)
while I see the apk in that path.
and then I get:
ActivityManager: Process ProcessRecord{dd649ae 3859:*my.service.name
<http://my.service.name>*/1000} failed to attach
What am I doing wrong?
What I changed from the previous version is:
- adding seapp_contexts
- adding mac_permissions.xml
- adding new_domain.te
I suspect my error is with the mac_permissions.xml file.
Where do I put it? under the same folder as the rest sepolicy settings of
my app? (I have a whole stack, built of native service and native
libraries).
what exactly is its content?
this is what I have now:
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<policy>
<signer signature="@PLATFORM" >
<package name="*my.service.name <http://my.service.name>*">
<seinfo value="*my_seinfo_val*" />
</package>
</signer>
</policy>
Thanks!!
2016-12-02 20:40 GMT+02:00 Stephen Smalley <[email protected]>:
> On 12/02/2016 01:31 PM, Helen Chiang wrote:
> > On Fri, Dec 2, 2016 at 10:09 AM, Stephen Smalley <[email protected]
> > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
> >
> > On 12/02/2016 12:28 PM, Helen Chiang wrote:
> > > I have a similar situation. We're customizing AOSP (Marshmallow and
> > > Nougat) and developing a device diagnostic service that runs as
> "system"
> > > user and installed as a privileged app. The use cases of this app
> is to
> > > read /proc/<PID>/stat periodically for overall OS process
> information.
> >
> > Generally I would expect such functionality to go into the
> > system_server, as part of the AMS, or another system service. An app
> > could certainly present the UI for viewing that information, but
> > wouldn't directly need to access the /proc/pid files.
> >
> >
> > I can't find any APIs from AMS that will return CPU elapsed time.
> > SystemHealthManager is only on Nougat and the stats it returns is
> > dependent on battery status so it wouldn't satisfy our use case.
> > Ultimately, we're planning to create a new system service that will
> > provide the info but for our immediate needs, we have to customize the
> > policy files.
>
> Yes, I would extend AMS I think.
>
> >
> >
> > > In principal, this app should be able to access everything that a
> > > system_app would, in addition to /proc/<PID>/stat. It also creates
> and
> > > access shared memory and unix sockets. Your previous answer
> implied that
> > > it would be insecure to make "system_app" a mlstrustedsubject. So,
> I
> > > want to create a new domain that has all the access as system_app
> and
> > > priv_app + mlstrustedsubject. Is there a way to do this without
> copying
> > > and pasting the rules directly from system_app and priv_app te
> files?
> > > Also, what allow rules are needed for shared memory and socket
> r/w ?
> >
> > No, you'd have to copy and modify the rules at present (if this
> became
> > common, then one would perhaps move the rules to a macro in
> te_macros or
> > elsewhere, and then call the macro from both files). However, you
> have
> > to be careful because there may be neverallow rules on system_app or
> > priv_app that will prevent compiling your policy if you copy certain
> > rules to your new domain that are supposed to be restricted to only
> > system_app or priv_app, and CTS also checks those neverallows.
> >
> >
> > I did run into and removed the offending allow rules. Are you saying
> > that if everything compiles with AOSP rules, CTS won't be an issue or
> > does CTS have additional checks?
>
> You removed the offending allow rules from your domain, or the
> neverallow rules that triggered the failure? CTS has a collection of
> SELinux tests, including checking all neverallows from the AOSP policy
> for that version of Android. So you can't just remove neverallows from
> your policy to escape them. But if you removed the offending allow
> rules and your app still works, that is ok. seandroid.bitbucket.org has
> a list of CTS tests related to SELinux, although it may not be entirely
> up-to-date.
>
> > > 2. seapp_contexts
> > >
> > > user=system seinfo=mydiag domain=trusted_diag type=app_data_file
> > > levelFrom=user
> >
> > Why levelFrom=user? Does your app run per-user? If so, then it
> would
> > already run with the same category set as the user's apps and
> therefore
> > wouldn't need mlstrustedsubject.
> >
> >
> > It also needs access to files for system_app, and radio. Would still
> > need mlstrustedsubject then?
>
> What kind of access? Read or write?
> Also, you probably ought to use your own type (e.g.
> type=mydiag_app_data_file) for your data files rather than just leaving
> them in app_data_file, since that is accessible to untrusted apps
> (modulo DAC).
>
_______________________________________________
Seandroid-list mailing list
[email protected]
To unsubscribe, send email to [email protected].
To get help, send an email containing "help" to
[email protected].
