[Search for users] [Overall Top Noters] [List of all Conferences] [Download this site]

Conference smurf::dec_mls_plus

Title:dec_mls_plus
Moderator:SMURF::BAT
Created:Mon Nov 29 1993
Last Modified:Fri Jun 06 1997
Last Successful Update:Fri Jun 06 1997
Number of topics:534
Total number of notes:2544

520.0. "Problem with missing commands on tape built systems" by NQOS01::zkodhcp-29-112-17.zko.dec.com::becker () Thu May 22 1997 13:28

Here is a question from Sue Heath at Trusted Computer Solutions, who is 
porting an application to Alpha and MLS+.  They are on the AlphaStation 255 
with MLS+ 4.0A

Thanks in advance,
Phil


I'm having a problem on systems that have been restored from tape.  Repeat
this does NOT happen on systems built from the CD.  Only on systems built
from tape.  There are 335 commands in the /usr/bin directory and users can
only see 311 of them.  I can't figure out why.  The commands that users
can't see are things like mail, vi, view, man, whatis, zcat.  There are 24
of them.  I can't see anything special about these commands except that
when you do a long listing of them, none of them have a "1" in the field
right after the permission bits (I think it's the field that designates
number of links).  Here are some of the things I've checked:

1.  The classification of all the commands is unclassified.
2.  The link between bin and /usr/bin is created correctly (at least
according to the instructions).  It's 777 permission bits, owned by root,
created at unclassified.
3.  The user's path is
/usr/users/<username>/bin:.:/bin:/usr/bin:/usr/bin/X11:/usr/ucb
4.  Users cannot see these commands from any sensitivity level.
5.  root can see them all.
6.  The permission bits on the commands are r-xr-xr-x in most cases.
7.  The user gets "command not found" if they try to execute the command.
8.  If the user cd's to the /usr/bin directory, and does an ls -l <command
name>, they cannot get a listing of it because they can't see that it is
there.

I'm stumped.  This is causing us some big problems with getting things
working.  If I could talk to someone in engineering, it would help.

Thanks.

Sue

==========================================================================
Susan A. Heath                                        sheath@tcs-sec.com
Trusted Computer Solutions, Inc.                      Phone: 703-318-7134
13873 Park Center Road                                Fax:   703-318-5041
Suite 225
Herndon, VA 20171

T.RTitleUserPersonal
Name
DateLines
520.1Check using lslabel NNTPD::&quot;may@kamlia.zk3.dec.com&quot;mayThu May 22 1997 15:3835
	Phil, 
	Could you have Sue do the following:
As root, cd to /usr/bin and do an lslabel on
mail, vi, view, man, whatis, and zcat
	Verify that they all return the following for the
SL's and IL's:
         [SL]        UNCLASSIFIED
         [IL]        UNCLASSIFIED
         [Name SL]   WILDCARD
         [Name IL]   WILDCARD

	Also, check the /usr and /usr/bin directories and the
/bin link using:
lslabel -d /usr
/usr     [SL]        UNCLASSIFIED
         [IL]        UNCLASSIFIED
         [Name SL]   WILDCARD
         [Name IL]   WILDCARD
lslabel -d /usr/bin
/usr/bin     [SL]        UNCLASSIFIED
             [IL]        UNCLASSIFIED
             [Name SL]   WILDCARD
             [Name IL]   WILDCARD
# lslabel -d /bin
/bin     [SL]        UNCLASSIFIED
         [IL]        UNCLASSIFIED
         [Name SL]   WILDCARD
         [Name IL]   WILDCARD


		Thanks,
		Mark

[Posted by WWW Notes gateway]
520.2MLS+ restore anomily - applies only to 24 commandsNQOS01::zkodhcp-29-112-17.zko.dec.com::beckerFri May 23 1997 14:1921
Sue at Trusted Computer Solutions writes as below and thanks for the help.  
Any comment on her additional question?  Phil

I checked everything Mark suggested and found the problem.  The name SL for
those commands was set to something higher than the user's clearance.  So
my next question is, what about the restore process caused this to happen?
I checked the source disk that I made the tape from and the SL's are
correct on it.  I made the dump at syshi and did the restore at syshi
according to the instructions.  Also, this isn't a one time anomoly.  It's
happened everytime I've done a restore from tape.  It doesn't make sense to
me that it only happens to 24 commands but obviously there must be a
reason.  Any ideas?

Also, the SLs for the directories weren't set exactly correctly.  Most
labels were unclassified instead of wildcard.  It's easy enough to set them
correctly, but again, why aren't they preserved during the restore process.
 I can sort of understand the link between /bin and /usr/bin being messed
up since it goes across a filesystem but not /usr and /usr/bin themselves.

Again, thanks for your help.

520.3maybe restore of wildcard labels is broken?SMURF::BATSegui la tua beatitudineWed May 28 1997 20:1130
    It is possible that restore is not restoring WILDCARD correctly.
    
    Until we investigate, try this as a workaround:
    
    add an entry in the "files file" (man 4 files, aka
    /etc/auth/system/files), after all the other /usr/bin/ entries (at end
    is okay), that looks like this:
    
    /usr/bin/*:\
            :f_mode#0555:f_owner=bin:f_group=bin:f_slevel=syslo:\
            :f_acl=WILDCARD:chkent:
    
    All files that are not in the files file explicitly otherwise, will get
    the above as its entry.
    
    If there is not an entry in the files file already, and the setting of
    the mode bits, label, etc., is not supposed to be as above, then put an
    explicit entry in the files file for it.  (Sorry for the double
    negatives.)  Put the above "wildcard" (*) entry after all the other
    /usr/bin/something entries -- so that it affects only those that have
    not been already affected.
    
    In the meantime, we'll look to see what's with restore.
    Since you found problems with only 24 files, you may prefer to put
    entries in the files file for just those files.
    
    Then after running restore, run /tcb/bin/setfiles to get the labels set
    to their proper values.  In this case, the files can be syslo or
    WILDCARD as you please (there is no need in this case for anything to
    be WILDCARD, I'm not sure why they are set up/shipped that way).
520.4Thanks for the suggestionNQOS01::zkodhcp-29-112-17.zko.dec.com::beckerThu May 29 1997 14:133
Sue says, "Thanks for the answer to my question.  It's a 
good idea.  Can't believe I
didn't think of it myself!
520.5restore -i is the problemNNTPD::&quot;may@kamlia.zk3.dec.com&quot;mayMon Jun 02 1997 15:1633
	Phil,
	I have just found out that the interactive version "-i" option
to the restore command is causing the name SL and IL problem. If you 
use the noninteractive "-r" option, the name SL and IL's are restored
correctly. This fails the same way on MLS V3.1A and MLS V4.0. I am 
looking into exactly why this is happening now.
	FYI - This is how I checked it out:
	1) newfs'd a scratch partition and mounted it to the /junk directory.
	2) cd /junk
	3) mkdir bin and set mode, owner, group, sl, il, name sl, name il to 
		match /usr/bin
	4) cd /junk/bin
	5) cp -p /usr/bin/mail, vi, view, zcat and set the sl, il, name sl, 
		name il on all files to match the originals.
	6) added the /junk directory to the /etc/fstab file
	7) setlevel -s syshi
	8) dump -0unf /dev/rmt0h /junk
	9) after the dump completed, cd /junk
	10) restore -rdvYf /dev/rmt0h   "This works fine, the name SL's and IL's
					are always correct."
	11) restore -idvYf /dev/rmt0h
		restore> cd bin
		restore> add zcat
		restore> extract
	12) After the interactive restore, an "lslabel /junk/bin/*" will show
		all files except zcat have correct "WILDCARD" settings for
		the name SL and name IL. zcat is incorrectly set to 
		"UNCLASSIFIED"


				Mark 
[Posted by WWW Notes gateway]
520.6a bathole?SMURF::BATSegui la tua beatitudineMon Jun 02 1997 17:2410
    Mark, just for your information:
    
    TRW has filed two QARs against V2 dump/restore regarding WILDCARDs and
    interactive restore (see 14024 and 14025 in the u32qar database).
    
    The reason I mention this is because it might be the same problem in
    V3/V4 and also because there is a pending security policy issue with
    interactive restore.  It was resolved (but not yet implemented) as: 
    "Only a user with the isso command auth would be able to use the -i
    switch."