home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- .\" Use -mm macros
- .ds Rh 1003.6: Security Extensions
- .ds Au Ana Mar\o'i\(aa'a de Alvar\o'e\(aa' <anamaria@sgi.com>
- .ds Dt January 7-11, 1991
- .ds Lo New Orleans, LA
- .ds Ed Jeffrey S. Haemer <jsh@usenix.org>
- .ds Wd U\s-3SENIX\s0 Standards Watchdog Committee
- .if '\*(Su'' \{\
- .ds Su the \*(Dt meeting in \*(Lo:
- .\}
- .if n \{\
- .tm Subject: Standards Update, \*(Rh
- .tm From: \*(Ed
- .tm Reply-To: std-unix@uunet.uu.net
- .tm Organization: \*(Wd
- .tm
- .\}
- .S 12
- .TL
- An Update on U\s-3NIX\s0\u\s-41\s0\d-Related Standards Activities
- .FS 1.
- UNIX\u\(rg\d is a Registered Trademark of UNIX System Laboratories
- in the United States and other countries.
- .FE
- .nr :p 1
- .sp
- \*(Rh
- .AF "\*(Ed, Report Editor"
- .AU "\*(Wd"
- .MT 4
- .if n \{\
- .nh
- .na
- .\}
- .PF "'\*(DT Standards Update' '\*(Rh'"
- \*(DT
- .sp
- .P
- \fB\*(Au\fP reports on \*(Su
- .P
- .HU "Overview"
- The P1003.6 group met for the entire week.
- Our main task was preparing draft 8 for mock ballot.
- We also planned for P1003.6 test assertions
- and discussed file locking,
- manipulating or duplicating the information in opaque data objects,
- and allowing \fIps\fP
- to show privileges and \s-1MAC\s0 labels of processes.
- .P
- We also heard two proposals at the meeting,
- one on Privileges and one on Discretionary Access Control,
- which I discuss in the relevant subgroup sections, below.
- .HU "Mock Ballot"
- P1003.6 plans to go to mock ballot
- after our April meeting.
- We will review comments at the July meeting,
- and try to ballot the document soon afterwards.
- The October meeting will be used for ballot resolution and clean-up.
- .P
- To prepare for mock ballot,
- the working group submitted written comments on the current draft,
- and subgroups spent the week addressing them.
- Commenters included
- Chris Hughes (\s-1ICL\s0),
- Roland Clouse (Unisys),
- Dan Ujihara (\s-1SUN\s0),
- and me (\s-1SGI\s0).
- .HU "Test Assertion Plans"
- The group decided to create a separate test-assertions document
- that parallels the current document.
- Each subgroup will be responsible for its own test assertions,
- and will ensure that the assertions document
- and the main document remain consistent.
- (I.e., any updates to the P1003.6 document
- will trigger changes to the assertions document.)
- Dave Rogers (Data Logic) and I are co-chairing this effort.
- If you are interested in helping to write test assertions,
- please let us know.
- .HU "Opaque Security Data Object Duplication"
- Duplicating the information in opaque security data objects
- \(em \s-1ACL\s0s, labels, and privileges \(em
- presents three distinct kinds of problems:
- .AL
- .LI
- duplicating the information within a process,
- .LI
- passing the information between processes in a single system, and
- .LI
- exporting the information out of a system.
- .LE
- .P
- Copying the information within a process is simple.
- What's hard is copying it out of the process's context
- \(em for example, for backups.
- We decided that such exporting will require
- passing out both object addresses and sizes,
- as well as data characteristics,
- such as \fIbinary\fP, \fItext\fP, or \fIfunction\fP.
- .HU "Privileges"
- John Griffith (\s-1HP/Apollo\s0) presented
- a new privileges proposal that simplified
- determining whether a process has, lacks, or inherits a privilege.
- .P
- In draft 8,
- a process could only inherit privilege
- if the ``allowed'' file-privilege attribute was set:
- inheritance, through the inheritable group,
- depended on restrictions provided by the ``allowed'' file privilege attribute.
- .P
- The subgroup agreed that this needed simplifying.
- The newly agreed-on substitute is that
- a privilege can be inheritable
- if it exists in the inheritable group
- or if the file's ``forced'' privilege attribute is on.
- In other words, after an exec occurs, a
- privilege that is on in the inheritable privilege group
- can turn itself on in the permitted privilege group.
- .P
- The subgroup spent much of the remaining time
- editing its part of the document.
- Two issues I hope will be resolved next meeting are:
- .AL
- .LI
- accommodating privileged shell scripts in the current proposal, and
- .LI
- determining how to store privilege information for later use.
- .LE
- .HU "Discretionary Access Control"
- The new \s-1DAC\s0 proposal consisted of two documents
- representing a collaborative effort by Paul Karger (\s-1OSF\s0),
- Rand Hoven (\s-1HP/APOLLO\s0),
- and Jon Spencer (Data General).
- It tried to
- simplify the way
- default \s-1ACL\s0s and \s-1MASK\s0_\s-1OBJ\s0s work,
- and it removed any requirement for \s-1MASK\s0_\s-1OBJ\s0 entries
- when no additional \s-1ACL\s0 entries existed.
- In the end,
- we decided to retain the old scheme
- but will try to shore up areas
- that the new proposal pointed out were particularly weak.
- The proposal's sponsors agreed to this,
- providing the new draft offers a satisfactory alternative simplification.
- .P
- The subgroup also attacked the opaque object issue described earlier,
- defining an interface
- to interconvert \s-1DAC\s0 opaque objects and text strings,
- and a relocatable \s-1ACL\s0 format
- that can be stored in an audit record.
- .P
- The \s-1DAC\s0 subgroup will pass their draft to the full group
- after the next meeting.
- .HU "Mandatory Access Control"
- The \s-1MAC\s0 subgroup
- discussed the written comments to their section
- and feel they will be ready for ballot after the next meeting.
- .P
- Two major issues arose:
- .AL
- .LI
- whether our document should address special (block and character device) files,
- and
- .LI
- whether we needed a \fIdup()\fP-like function to copy internal formats.
- .LE
- .P
- The subgroup decided the current version of P1003.6
- shouldn't address terminals or other special files,
- but the second issue will be passed on to the entire group.
- .HU "Audit"
- The Audit subgroup discussed all the written comments
- and will only need one more meeting to be ready for ballot.
- Their work,
- including mandatory record types,
- will be based on \s-1X/O\s0pen's.
- They will not address Portable Data Record Format,
- and optional record types will be implementation-defined.
- .P
- Clearly, audit functions
- will need both pointers to objects and their sizes
- to operate on \s-1MAC\s0, \s-1DAC\s0, and Privilege opaque data.
- Because of this,
- I predict all three subgroups will have to provide interfaces
- to provide the information.
- .HU "Liaison .6/.7/.8"
- The liaison group met again
- to discuss areas of compatibility and overlap between our respective documents.
- (The October P1003.6 snitch report sketches our ongoing agenda.)
- We identified areas that P1003.6 (Security),
- P1003.7 (System Administration),
- and P1003.8 (\s-1TFA\s0) already handle,
- areas we might handle,
- and areas that are falling through the cracks.
- After we finish identifying areas of concern,
- we may write \s-1PAR\s0s for anything we cannot farm out to existing groups.
- In April, we will discuss how to report our findings
- back to the three groups.
-