Re: [PATCH v2] selinux: preserve user SID across nested backing files

Amir Goldstein <[email protected]>
Newsgroups org.kernel.vger.linux-fsdevel,org.kernel.vger.linux-kernel,org.kernel.vger.linux-unionfs,org.kernel.vger.selinux,org.kernel.vger.stable
Message-ID <CAOQ4uxj+uFAR3YjE+XX98iJAdxNNqnaM6pptsqPaXnqJk4OXWg@mail.gmail.com>
On Thu, Aug 20, 2026 at 7:58 PM Karl Mehltretter <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> SELinux saves the user file SID in a backing-file security blob so it
> remains available after mmap() replaces vma->vm_file with a backing file.
>
> For nested backing files (overlayfs over overlayfs, or FUSE passthrough
> backed by overlayfs), user_file may itself be a backing file.  Its
> fsec->sid is the SID of the mounter that opened it, rather than the user
> that opened the top-level file.  mprotect() then checks fd { use } against
> the mounter SID.  This can incorrectly deny access without a domain
> transition, or check the wrong target SID after one.
>
> Copy the saved user SID when user_file is a backing file.  Keep using the
> regular file SID for the first backing layer.
>
> With two nested overlayfs mounts and SELinux enforcing,
> mprotect(PROT_READ) returns EACCES with an fd { use } denial against the
> mounter SID.  With this change, mprotect() succeeds.
>
> Fixes: 82544d36b172 ("selinux: fix overlayfs mmap() and mprotect() access checks")
> Cc: [email protected]
> Assisted-by: Codex:gpt-5.6-sol
> Signed-off-by: Karl Mehltretter <[email protected]>

Reviewed-by: Amir Goldstein <[email protected]>

> ---
> Changes in v2:
> - Add selinux_file_user_sid() helper instead of open-coding the lookup
>   (Amir).
>
> Tested on arm64 QEMU at fd6e2388a3ea with SELinux enforcing and two
> nested overlayfs mounts. The policy omitted only
> base_t -> mounter_t:fd { use } among the relevant cross-domain allows:
>
>   baseline: mprotect(PROT_READ) returned EACCES with that denial
>   patched:  mprotect(PROT_READ) succeeded; test exited 0
>
> This patch fixes SID propagation only. backing_file_user_path() still
> resolves to the middle layer for a nested mapping, so the audit path and
> inode do not correspond to uf_sid, and that layer's mounter is not
> re-checked. Preserving the full user path likely needs a VFS-side change,
> such as having backing_file_open() store file_user_path(user_file).
>
>  security/selinux/hooks.c          | 9 ++++++++-
>  security/selinux/include/objsec.h | 2 +-
>  2 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/security/selinux/hooks.c b/security/selinux/hooks.c
> index 1ead2eee1944..171b90412ff1 100644
> --- a/security/selinux/hooks.c
> +++ b/security/selinux/hooks.c
> @@ -3843,13 +3843,20 @@ static int selinux_file_alloc_security(struct file *file)
>         return 0;
>  }
>
> +static inline u32 selinux_file_user_sid(const struct file *file)
> +{
> +       if (unlikely(file->f_mode & FMODE_BACKING))
> +               return selinux_backing_file(file)->uf_sid;
> +       return selinux_file(file)->sid;
> +}
> +
>  static int selinux_backing_file_alloc(struct file *backing_file,
>                                       const struct file *user_file)
>  {
>         struct backing_file_security_struct *bfsec;
>
>         bfsec = selinux_backing_file(backing_file);
> -       bfsec->uf_sid = selinux_file(user_file)->sid;
> +       bfsec->uf_sid = selinux_file_user_sid(user_file);
>
>         return 0;
>  }
> diff --git a/security/selinux/include/objsec.h b/security/selinux/include/objsec.h
> index 3c0a16ec978b..853f7266ed18 100644
> --- a/security/selinux/include/objsec.h
> +++ b/security/selinux/include/objsec.h
> @@ -87,7 +87,7 @@ struct file_security_struct {
>  };
>
>  struct backing_file_security_struct {
> -       u32 uf_sid; /* associated user file fsec->sid */
> +       u32 uf_sid; /* top-level user file fsec->sid */
>  };
>
>  struct superblock_security_struct {
>
> base-commit: fd6e2388a3ea55e58cbbbef840c1d8aa2067dbb3
> --
> 2.39.5 (Apple Git-154)
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.