From Fedora Project Wiki
(Replaced content with "")
Line 1: Line 1:
<!-- Self Contained or System Wide Change Proposal?
Use this guide to determine to which category your proposed change belongs to.
Self Contained Changes are:
* changes to isolated/leaf package without the impact on other packages/rest of the distribution
* limited scope changes without the impact on other packages/rest of the distribution
* coordinated effort within SIG with limited impact outside SIG functional area, accepted by the SIG
System Wide Changes are:
* changes that does not fit Self Contained Changes category touching
* changes that require coordination within the distribution (for example mass rebuilds, release engineering or other teams effort etc.)
* changing system defaults
For Self Contained Changes, sections marked as "REQUIRED FOR SYSTEM WIDE CHANGES" are OPTIONAL but FESCo/Wrangler can request more details (especially in case the change proposal category is
improper or updated to System Wide category). For System Wide Changes all fields on this form are required for FESCo acceptance (when applies). 
We request that you maintain the same order of sections so that all of the change proposal pages are uniform.
= Enable SELinux Labeled NFS Support <!-- The name of your feature --> =
== Summary ==
<!-- A sentence or two summarizing what this feature is and what it will do.  This information is used for the overall feature summary page for each release. -->
The Linux Kernel has grown support for passing SELinux labels between a client and server using NFS.
== Owner ==
For change proposals to quality as self-contained, owners of all affected packages need to be included here. Alternatively, a SIG can be listed as an owner if it owns all affected packages.
This should link to your home wiki page so we know who you are.
* Name: [[User:dwalsh| Daniel Walsh]]
* Name: [[User:steved| Steve Dickson]]
<!-- Include you email address that you can be reached should people want to contact you about helping with your change, status is requested, or technical issues need to be resolved. If the change proposal is owned by a SIG, please also add a primary contact person. -->
* Email: <>
* Email: <>
== Current status ==
* Targeted release: [Fedora 20]
* Last updated: Jul 24 2013
<!-- After the change proposal is accepted by FESCo, tracking bug is created in Bugzilla and linked to this page
Bugzilla states meaning as usual:
NEW -> change proposal is submitted and announced
ASSIGNED -> accepted by FESCo with on going development
MODIFIED -> change is substantially done and testable
ON_QA -> change is code completed and could be tested in the Beta release (optionally by QA)
CLOSED as NEXTRELEASE -> change is completed and verified and will be delivered in next release under development
* Tracker bug: <will be assigned by the Wrangler>
* Percentage of completion: 90%
** selinux-policy fixes are in Fedora 20.
** Labeled NFS Support is in 3.11.0-0.rc0.git7.1.fc20.x86_64 kernel
** nfs-utils support
** mount support
== Detailed Description ==
<!-- Expand on the summary, if appropriate.  A couple sentences suffices to explain the goal, but the more details you can provide the better. -->
We have always needed to treat NFS mounts with a single label usually something like nfs_t.  Or at best allow an administrator to override the default with
a label using the mount --context option.  With this change we have lots of different Labels supported on an NFS share.
== Benefit to Fedora ==
<!-- What is the benefit to the platform?  If this is a major capability update, what has changed?  If this is a new feature, what capabilities does it bring? Why will Fedora become a better distribution or project because of this feature?-->
There are two huge benefits for Fedora, in that currently we can not differentiate different labels on a single NFS mount point.  Applications like Secure Virtualization as launched by libvirt, can not set the label of an image file on an NFS share, so sVirt separation is severely weakened.  Similarly if you setup home
directories on an NFS share, then any confined application that needs to write a file in a home directory now can write any file on an NFS Share. 
With labeled NFS this vulnerability goes away.
== Scope ==
<!-- What work do the developers have to accomplish to complete the change in time for release?  Is it a large change affecting many parts of the distribution or is it a very isolated change? What are those changes?-->
* Proposal owners:
<!-- What work do the feature owners have to accomplish to complete the feature in time for release?  Is it a large change affecting many parts of the distribution or is it a very isolated change? What are those changes?-->
* Other developers: N/A (not a System Wide Change) <!-- REQUIRED FOR SYSTEM WIDE CHANGES -->
<!-- What work do other developers have to accomplish to complete the feature in time for release?  Is it a large change affecting many parts of the distribution or is it a very isolated change? What are those changes?-->
* Release engineering: N/A (not a System Wide Change)  <!-- REQUIRED FOR SYSTEM WIDE CHANGES -->
<!-- Does this feature require coordination with release engineering (e.g. changes to installer image generation or update package delivery)?  Is a mass rebuid required?  If a rel-eng ticket exists, add a link here.  -->
* Policies and guidelines: N/A (not a System Wide Change) <!-- REQUIRED FOR SYSTEM WIDE CHANGES -->
<!-- Do the packaging guidelines or other documents need to be updated for this feature?  If so, does it need to happen before or after the implementation is done?  If a FPC ticket exists, add a link here. -->
Turn on Labeled NFS in the Fedora Kernel,  Fix any policy issues that arise because of this.  I believe this is mainly a testing issue, and that the functionality is comeplete.
== Upgrade/compatibility impact ==
<!-- What happens to systems that have had a previous versions of Fedora installed and are updated to the version containing this change? Will anything require manual configuration or data migration? Will any existing functionality be no longer supported? -->
N/A (not a System Wide Change)
== How To Test ==
== How To Test ==
<!-- This does not need to be a full-fledged document. Describe the dimensions of tests that this change implementation is expected to pass when it is done.  If it needs to be tested with different hardware or software configurations, indicate them.  The more specific you can be, the better the community testing can be.
Remember that you are writing this how to for interested testers to use to check out your change implementation - documenting what you do for testing is OK, but it's much better to document what *I* can do to test your change.
A good "how to test" should answer these four questions:
0. What special hardware / data / etc. is needed (if any)?
1. How do I prepare my system to test this change? What packages
need to be installed, config files edited, etc.?
2. What specific actions do I perform to check that the change is
working like it's supposed to?
3. What are the expected results of those actions?
Do to a bug in nfs-utils:
* Server Side
Start/Stop nfs server.
    systemctl start nfs
    systemctl stop nfs
Set the version
    echo "+4.2" > /proc/fs/nfsd/versions
Start Server Again
    systemctl start nfs
* Client Side
    mount  -o v4.2 server:mntpoint localmountpoint
There are many different scenarios that have to be tested with this new functionality.
Basically with Labeled NFS we need to test with client and servers supporting LNFS and SELinux
SELinux Testing
* SELinux Client LNFS - SELinux Server LNFS
* SELinux Client LNFS - SELinux Server No LNFS
* SELinux CLient LNFS - Server LNFS
* SELinux CLient LNFS - Server No LNFS
* Client LNFS - SELinux Server LNFS
* Client LNFS - SELInux Server No LNFS
* Client LNFS - Server LNFS
* Client LNFS - Server no LNFS
* Client no LNFS - SELinux Server LNFS
* Client no LNFS - SELInux Server No LNFS
* Client no LNFS - Server LNFS
* Client no LNFS - Server no LNFS
Also need testing on three way.  IE You need two clients that support SELinux CLient NFS and change the label on one client, and make sure the other client sees the change.
== User Experience ==
<!-- If this change proposal is noticeable by its target audience, how will their experiences change as a result?  Describe what they will see or notice. -->
N/A (not a System Wide Change)
== Dependencies ==
<!-- What other packages (RPMs) depend on this package?  Are there changes outside the developers' control on which completion of this change depends?  In other words, completion of another change owned by someone else and might cause you to not be able to finish on time or that you would need to coordinate?  Other upstream projects like the kernel (if this is not a kernel change)? -->
N/A (not a System Wide Change)
== Contingency Plan ==
<!-- If you cannot complete your feature by the final development freeze, what is the backup plan?  This might be as simple as "None necessary, revert to previous release behaviour."  Or it might not.  If you feature is not completed in time we want to assure others that other parts of Fedora will not be in jeopardy.  -->
We can continue using what we always did, all clients labeled the same
== Documentation ==
<!-- Is there upstream documentation on this feature, or notes you have written yourself?  Link to that material here so other interested developers can get involved. -->
== Release Notes ==
<!-- The Fedora Release Notes inform end-users about what is new in the release.  Examples of past release notes are here: -->
<!-- The release notes also help users know how to deal with platform changes such as ABIs/APIs, configuration or data file formats, or upgrade concerns.  If there are any such changes involved in this feature, indicate them here.  You can also link to upstream documentation if it satisfies this need.  This information forms the basis of the release notes edited by the documentation team and shipped with the release. -->
== Comments and Discussion ==
* See [[Talk:Features/LabeledNFS]]  <!-- This adds a link to the "discussion" tab associated with your page.  This provides the ability to have ongoing comments or conversation without bogging down the main feature page -->
<!-- When your change proposal page is completed and ready for review and announcement -->
<!-- remove Category:ChangePageIncomplete and change it to Category:ChangeReadyForWrangler -->
<!-- The Wrangler announces the Change to the devel-announce list and changes the category to Category:ChangeAnnounced (no action required) -->
<!-- After review, the Wrangler will move your page to Category:ChangeReadyForFesco... if it still needs more work it will move back to Category:ChangePageIncomplete-->
<!-- Select proper category, default is Self Contained Change -->
<!-- [[Category:SystemWideChange]] -->

Latest revision as of 14:11, 24 July 2013