From gww@sac.sfbay.sun.com Wed Mar 18 11:40:13 2009 Received: from sunmail2sca.sfbay.sun.com (sunmail2sca.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.145.155.234]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n2IIeDJQ026979 for ; Wed, 18 Mar 2009 11:40:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (brm-avmta-1.Central.Sun.COM [129.147.4.11]) by sunmail2sca.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.13.7/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id n2IIdpsx024628; Wed, 18 Mar 2009 11:40:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com by brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0KGP00J0NT6YCH00@brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com>; Wed, 18 Mar 2009 12:40:10 -0600 (MDT) Received: from dm-sfbay-02.sfbay.sun.com ([129.146.11.31]) by brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0KGP0098RT6X7LC0@brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com>; Wed, 18 Mar 2009 12:40:09 -0600 (MDT) Received: from sac.sfbay.sun.com (sac.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.146.226.132]) by dm-sfbay-02.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id n2IIe80Y017262; Wed, 18 Mar 2009 11:40:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sac.sfbay.sun.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n2IIe7lS026974; Wed, 18 Mar 2009 11:40:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from gww@localhost) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8/Submit) id n2IIe7Xr026970; Wed, 18 Mar 2009 11:40:07 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 18 Mar 2009 11:40:07 -0700 (PDT) From: Gary Winiger Subject: 20 Questions # 5 update [PSARC/2009/179 FastTrack timeout 03/25/2009] To: psarc-ext@sun.com Message-id: <200903181840.n2IIe7Xr026970@sac.sfbay.sun.com> Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.4.1.325704 Status: RO Content-Length: 2199 At PSARC business today, we discussed a change to question 8 to prompt project teams to consider not only if they run in zones, but also if they affect Branded zones. Some of the motivation for adding "Branded zones" came from a question from the security group as to how to cover taking into account Trusted Extensions (TX). It was suggested that something also be added to the security question #5. I've created this case to capture my initial proposals and any conversation. I'd like to receive input in a bounded time, so I've set a timer for 25 Mar, 2009. Thanks, Gary.. =============================================================================== Proposal 1: 5. Projects need to be aware of the overall security of the system and how their components affect it. Which parts of this project are critical to the security of the system to avoid such unintended consequences such as unauthorized system entry, unauthorized access to or modification of data, elevation of privilege, denial of service, ...? Does this project - require elevated privilege? + require elevated privilege? Does the project interact with or affect + Solaris Trusted Extensions (TX)? A number of specific policies and practices address various aspects of the security of the system. They are found in appendix 1. Which of these are applicable to this project, and how are they addressed? Proposal 2: 5. Projects need to be aware of the overall security of the system and how their components affect it. Which parts of this project are critical to the security of the system to avoid such unintended consequences such as unauthorized system entry, unauthorized access to or modification of - data, elevation of privilege, denial of service, ...? Does this project + data, elevation of privilege, denial of service, violation of labeled + security, ...? Does this project require elevated privilege? A number of specific policies and practices address various aspects of the security of the system. They are found in appendix 1. Which of these are applicable to this project, and how are they addressed? From tim.haley@sun.com Wed Mar 18 11:47:48 2009 Received: from newsunmail1brm.central.sun.com (newsunmail1brm.Central.Sun.COM [129.147.62.245]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n2IIlmfk027440 for ; Wed, 18 Mar 2009 11:47:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM (nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.146.11.74]) by newsunmail1brm.central.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.13.7/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id n2IIllfR043157 for <@sunmail2sca.sfbay.sun.com:psarc-ext@sun.com>; Wed, 18 Mar 2009 12:47:48 -0600 (MDT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0KGP00407TJM4800@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM> for psarc-ext@sun.com (ORCPT psarc-ext@sun.com); Wed, 18 Mar 2009 11:47:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from brmea-mail-2.sun.com ([192.18.98.43]) by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0KGP00LADTJMZF60@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM> for psarc-ext@sun.com (ORCPT psarc-ext@sun.com); Wed, 18 Mar 2009 11:47:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from fe-amer-10.sun.com ([192.18.109.80]) by brmea-mail-2.sun.com (8.13.6+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id n2IIlkjA011804 for ; Wed, 18 Mar 2009 18:47:46 +0000 (GMT) Received: from conversion-daemon.mail-amer.sun.com by mail-amer.sun.com (Sun Java(tm) System Messaging Server 7.0-5.01 64bit (built Feb 19 2009)) id <0KGP00E00SI1M100@mail-amer.sun.com> for psarc-ext@sun.com (ORCPT psarc-ext@sun.com); Wed, 18 Mar 2009 12:47:46 -0600 (MDT) Received: from [172.20.25.27] ([unknown] [172.20.25.27]) by mail-amer.sun.com (Sun Java(tm) System Messaging Server 7.0-5.01 64bit (built Feb 19 2009)) with ESMTPSA id <0KGP004U8TIXVAG0@mail-amer.sun.com>; Wed, 18 Mar 2009 12:47:25 -0600 (MDT) Date: Wed, 18 Mar 2009 12:47:21 -0600 From: Tim Haley Subject: Re: 20 Questions # 5 update [PSARC/2009/179 FastTrack timeout 03/25/2009] In-reply-to: <200903181840.n2IIe7Xr026970@sac.sfbay.sun.com> Sender: Timothy.Haley@sun.com To: Gary Winiger Cc: psarc-ext@sun.com Message-id: <49C141B9.6030009@sun.com> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.4.1.325704 References: <200903181840.n2IIe7Xr026970@sac.sfbay.sun.com> User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.18 (X11/20090223) Status: RO Content-Length: 2486 Gary Winiger wrote: > At PSARC business today, we discussed a change to question 8 to prompt > project teams to consider not only if they run in zones, but also if > they affect Branded zones. Some of the motivation for adding > "Branded zones" came from a question from the security group as to how > to cover taking into account Trusted Extensions (TX). > > It was suggested that something also be added to the security question #5. > I've created this case to capture my initial proposals and any conversation. > > I'd like to receive input in a bounded time, so I've set a timer for > 25 Mar, 2009. > > Thanks, > Gary.. > > =============================================================================== > Proposal 1: > > 5. Projects need to be aware of the overall security of the system and how > their components affect it. Which parts of this project are critical to > the security of the system to avoid such unintended consequences such > as unauthorized system entry, unauthorized access to or modification of > data, elevation of privilege, denial of service, ...? Does this project > - require elevated privilege? > + require elevated privilege? Does the project interact with or affect > + Solaris Trusted Extensions (TX)? > The question that comes to my mind is - would I know if my project affects TX? I've never run TX, and I imagine I'm not alone in that. Same for labeled security. -tim > A number of specific policies and practices address various aspects of > the security of the system. They are found in appendix 1. Which of > these are applicable to this project, and how are they addressed? > > Proposal 2: > > 5. Projects need to be aware of the overall security of the system and how > their components affect it. Which parts of this project are critical to > the security of the system to avoid such unintended consequences such > as unauthorized system entry, unauthorized access to or modification of > - data, elevation of privilege, denial of service, ...? Does this project > + data, elevation of privilege, denial of service, violation of labeled > + security, ...? Does this project > require elevated privilege? > > A number of specific policies and practices address various aspects of > the security of the system. They are found in appendix 1. Which of > these are applicable to this project, and how are they addressed? > From gww@eng.sun.com Wed Mar 18 11:52:25 2009 Received: from sunmail4.singapore.sun.com (sunmail4.Singapore.Sun.COM [129.158.71.19]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n2IIqPSC027714 for ; Wed, 18 Mar 2009 11:52:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (nwk-avmta-2.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.145.155.6]) by sunmail4.singapore.sun.com (8.13.4+Sun/8.13.3/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id n2IIpmAT007198; Thu, 19 Mar 2009 02:52:24 +0800 (SGT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0KGP00F03TR8JH00@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com>; Wed, 18 Mar 2009 11:52:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dm-eng-02.sfbay.sun.com ([129.146.11.32]) by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0KGP00A3STR7DU90@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com>; Wed, 18 Mar 2009 11:52:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: from marduk.eng.sun.com (marduk.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.146.108.224]) by dm-eng-02.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id n2IIqJ1C027370; Wed, 18 Mar 2009 11:52:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: from marduk.eng.sun.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by marduk.eng.sun.com (8.13.6+Sun/8.12.11) with ESMTP id n2IIqrrk011703; Wed, 18 Mar 2009 10:52:53 -0800 (PST) Received: (from gww@localhost) by marduk.eng.sun.com (8.13.6+Sun/8.12.11/Submit) id n2IIqrWb011702; Wed, 18 Mar 2009 11:52:53 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 18 Mar 2009 11:52:53 -0700 (PDT) From: Gary Winiger Subject: Re: 20 Questions # 5 update [PSARC/2009/179 FastTrack timeout 03/25/2009] To: gww@sac.sfbay.sun.com, tim.haley@sun.com Cc: psarc-ext@sun.com Message-id: <200903181852.n2IIqrWb011702@marduk.eng.sun.com> Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-Sun-Charset: US-ASCII X-PMX-Version: 5.4.1.325704 Status: RO Content-Length: 994 > > 5. Projects need to be aware of the overall security of the system and how > > their components affect it. Which parts of this project are critical to > > the security of the system to avoid such unintended consequences such > > as unauthorized system entry, unauthorized access to or modification of > > data, elevation of privilege, denial of service, ...? Does this project > > - require elevated privilege? > > + require elevated privilege? Does the project interact with or affect > > + Solaris Trusted Extensions (TX)? > > > > The question that comes to my mind is - would I know if my project affects TX? > I've never run TX, and I imagine I'm not alone in that. Same for labeled > security. You could talk with the TX team. Just like you'd talk with any other team. IIRC, part of the C-Team integration list is to run tests that include TX tests. They are supposed to now be part of standard Product Integration Testing. Gary.. From Darren.Moffat@sun.com Thu Mar 19 03:14:08 2009 Received: from newsunmail1brm.central.sun.com (newsunmail1brm.Central.Sun.COM [129.147.62.245]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n2JAE7Vl015254 for ; Thu, 19 Mar 2009 03:14:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM (nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.146.11.74]) by newsunmail1brm.central.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.13.7/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id n2JAE4YM038540; Thu, 19 Mar 2009 04:14:07 -0600 (MDT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0KGR008230FIB700@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM>; Thu, 19 Mar 2009 03:14:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: from gmp-eb-inf-1.sun.com ([192.18.6.21]) by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0KGR000TC0FHB040@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM>; Thu, 19 Mar 2009 03:14:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: from fe-emea-09.sun.com (gmp-eb-lb-2-fe2.eu.sun.com [192.18.6.11]) by gmp-eb-inf-1.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id n2JAE5pP001914; Thu, 19 Mar 2009 10:14:05 +0000 (GMT) Received: from conversion-daemon.fe-emea-09.sun.com by fe-emea-09.sun.com (Sun Java(tm) System Messaging Server 7.0-5.01 64bit (built Feb 19 2009)) id <0KGQ00J00XN5E500@fe-emea-09.sun.com>; Thu, 19 Mar 2009 10:14:05 +0000 (GMT) Received: from [129.156.173.21] ([unknown] [129.156.173.21]) by fe-emea-09.sun.com (Sun Java(tm) System Messaging Server 7.0-5.01 64bit (built Feb 19 2009)) with ESMTPSA id <0KGR00A1L0FCKN20@fe-emea-09.sun.com>; Thu, 19 Mar 2009 10:14:02 +0000 (GMT) Date: Thu, 19 Mar 2009 10:14:00 +0000 From: Darren J Moffat Subject: Re: 20 Questions # 5 update [PSARC/2009/179 FastTrack timeout 03/25/2009] In-reply-to: <200903181852.n2IIqrWb011702@marduk.eng.sun.com> Sender: Darren.Moffat@sun.com To: Gary Winiger Cc: gww@sac.sfbay.sun.com, tim.haley@sun.com, psarc-ext@sun.com Message-id: <49C21AE8.3030202@Sun.COM> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.4.1.325704 References: <200903181852.n2IIqrWb011702@marduk.eng.sun.com> User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.18 (X11/20081201) Status: RO Content-Length: 1272 Gary Winiger wrote: >>> 5. Projects need to be aware of the overall security of the system and how >>> their components affect it. Which parts of this project are critical to >>> the security of the system to avoid such unintended consequences such >>> as unauthorized system entry, unauthorized access to or modification of >>> data, elevation of privilege, denial of service, ...? Does this project >>> - require elevated privilege? >>> + require elevated privilege? Does the project interact with or affect >>> + Solaris Trusted Extensions (TX)? >>> >> The question that comes to my mind is - would I know if my project affects TX? >> I've never run TX, and I imagine I'm not alone in that. Same for labeled >> security. > > You could talk with the TX team. Just like you'd talk with any > other team. IIRC, part of the C-Team integration list is to > run tests that include TX tests. They are supposed to now be part > of standard Product Integration Testing. If a project has issues with or works differently in zones then there could be a TX impact. Also if a project provides a GNOME desktop GUI that runs with privilege and/or changes system wide config then there could be a TX impact. -- Darren J Moffat From carlsonj@phorcys.east.sun.com Thu Mar 19 04:33:03 2009 Received: from newsunmail1brm.central.sun.com (newsunmail1brm.Central.Sun.COM [129.147.62.245]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n2JBX23t009807 for ; Thu, 19 Mar 2009 04:33:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM (nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.146.11.74]) by newsunmail1brm.central.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.13.7/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id n2JBWxYZ021841; Thu, 19 Mar 2009 05:33:01 -0600 (MDT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0KGR00I0H4308700@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM>; Thu, 19 Mar 2009 04:33:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from phorcys.east.sun.com ([129.148.174.143]) by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0KGR0008V42ZATF0@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM>; Thu, 19 Mar 2009 04:33:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from phorcys.east.sun.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by phorcys.east.sun.com (8.14.3+Sun/8.14.3) with ESMTP id n2JBWoiq002848; Thu, 19 Mar 2009 07:32:50 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from carlsonj@localhost) by phorcys.east.sun.com (8.14.3+Sun/8.14.3/Submit) id n2JBWo13002845; Thu, 19 Mar 2009 07:32:50 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 19 Mar 2009 07:32:50 -0400 From: James Carlson Subject: Re: 20 Questions # 5 update [PSARC/2009/179 FastTrack timeout 03/25/2009] In-reply-to: <49C21AE8.3030202@Sun.COM> To: Darren J Moffat Cc: Gary Winiger , psarc-ext@sun.com, gww@sac.sfbay.sun.com Message-id: <18882.11618.834002.352851@gargle.gargle.HOWL> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: VM 7.01 under Emacs 21.3.1 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.4.1.325704 References: <200903181852.n2IIqrWb011702@marduk.eng.sun.com> <49C21AE8.3030202@Sun.COM> Status: RO Content-Length: 1139 Darren J Moffat writes: > Gary Winiger wrote: > > You could talk with the TX team. Just like you'd talk with any > > other team. IIRC, part of the C-Team integration list is to > > run tests that include TX tests. They are supposed to now be part > > of standard Product Integration Testing. > > If a project has issues with or works differently in zones then there > could be a TX impact. Also if a project provides a GNOME desktop GUI > that runs with privilege and/or changes system wide config then there > could be a TX impact. Those are probably the easy cases. The harder ones are where, for example, a project handles data from multiple clients, and those clients might actually have different sensitivity levels. I don't know if we're doing much (if anything) to make more applications label-aware, but I think that's potentially one of the things that would be covered by the new language. -- James Carlson, Solaris Networking Sun Microsystems / 35 Network Drive 71.232W Vox +1 781 442 2084 MS UBUR02-212 / Burlington MA 01803-2757 42.496N Fax +1 781 442 1677 From gdamore@sun.com Thu Mar 19 08:25:41 2009 Received: from sunmail4.singapore.sun.com (sunmail4.Singapore.Sun.COM [129.158.71.19]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n2JFPeFp022250 for ; Thu, 19 Mar 2009 08:25:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (brm-avmta-1.Central.Sun.COM [129.147.4.11]) by sunmail4.singapore.sun.com (8.13.4+Sun/8.13.3/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id n2JFPZfh029199 for <@sunmail2sca.sfbay.sun.com:psarc-ext@sun.com>; Thu, 19 Mar 2009 23:25:38 +0800 (SGT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com by brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0KGR00513EUMFS00@brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com> for psarc-ext@sun.com (ORCPT psarc-ext@sun.com); Thu, 19 Mar 2009 09:25:34 -0600 (MDT) Received: from sca-es-mail-1.sun.com ([192.18.43.132]) by brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0KGR00K18EUL3270@brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com> for psarc-ext@sun.com (ORCPT psarc-ext@sun.com); Thu, 19 Mar 2009 09:25:34 -0600 (MDT) Received: from fe-sfbay-09.sun.com ([192.18.43.129]) by sca-es-mail-1.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id n2JFPX3m001046 for ; Thu, 19 Mar 2009 08:25:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from conversion-daemon.fe-sfbay-09.sun.com by fe-sfbay-09.sun.com (Sun Java(tm) System Messaging Server 7.0-5.01 64bit (built Feb 19 2009)) id <0KGR00700ERI2600@fe-sfbay-09.sun.com> for psarc-ext@sun.com (ORCPT psarc-ext@sun.com); Thu, 19 Mar 2009 08:25:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.251.11] ([unknown] [76.93.15.33]) by fe-sfbay-09.sun.com (Sun Java(tm) System Messaging Server 7.0-5.01 64bit (built Feb 19 2009)) with ESMTPSA id <0KGR002UVEUGQE10@fe-sfbay-09.sun.com>; Thu, 19 Mar 2009 08:25:33 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 19 Mar 2009 08:25:28 -0700 From: "Garrett D'Amore" Subject: Re: 20 Questions # 5 update [PSARC/2009/179 FastTrack timeout 03/25/2009] In-reply-to: <18882.11618.834002.352851@gargle.gargle.HOWL> Sender: Garrett.Damore@sun.com To: James Carlson Cc: Darren J Moffat , Gary Winiger , psarc-ext@sun.com, gww@sac.sfbay.sun.com Message-id: <49C263E8.9030009@sun.com> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.4.1.325704 References: <200903181852.n2IIqrWb011702@marduk.eng.sun.com> <49C21AE8.3030202@Sun.COM> <18882.11618.834002.352851@gargle.gargle.HOWL> User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.18 (X11/20081201) Status: RO Content-Length: 1194 James Carlson wrote: > Darren J Moffat writes: > >> Gary Winiger wrote: >> >>> You could talk with the TX team. Just like you'd talk with any >>> other team. IIRC, part of the C-Team integration list is to >>> run tests that include TX tests. They are supposed to now be part >>> of standard Product Integration Testing. >>> >> If a project has issues with or works differently in zones then there >> could be a TX impact. Also if a project provides a GNOME desktop GUI >> that runs with privilege and/or changes system wide config then there >> could be a TX impact. >> > > Those are probably the easy cases. The harder ones are where, for > example, a project handles data from multiple clients, and those > clients might actually have different sensitivity levels. > > I don't know if we're doing much (if anything) to make more > applications label-aware, but I think that's potentially one of the > things that would be covered by the new language. > > Any project with a device driver that is usable by ordinary users probably has TX impact. :-( The Boomer project has device allocation issues, that interact with TX, for example. -- Garrett From john.plocher@gmail.com Thu Mar 19 09:00:54 2009 Received: from sunmail2sca.sfbay.sun.com (sunmail2sca.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.145.155.234]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n2JG0sV3025242 for ; Thu, 19 Mar 2009 09:00:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (nwk-avmta-2.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.145.155.6]) by sunmail2sca.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.13.7/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id n2JG0ouc013947 for <@sunmail2sca.sfbay.sun.com:psarc-ext@sun.com>; Thu, 19 Mar 2009 09:00:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0KGR00J09GHHCF00@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com> for psarc-ext@sun.com (ORCPT psarc-ext@sun.com); Thu, 19 Mar 2009 09:00:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sca-ea-mail-2.sun.com ([192.18.43.25]) by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0KGR00GSNGHCQ160@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com> for psarc-ext@sun.com (ORCPT psarc-ext@sun.com); Thu, 19 Mar 2009 09:00:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from relay44i.sun.com ([192.5.209.118]) by sca-ea-mail-2.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id n2JFsltM014126 for ; Thu, 19 Mar 2009 16:00:48 +0000 (GMT) Received: from mmp42es.mmp.us.syntegra.com ([160.41.221.11] [160.41.221.11]) by relay44i.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-128355 for psarc-ext@sun.com; Thu, 19 Mar 2009 16:00:48 +0000 (Z) Received: from relay42i.sun.com (relay42i.sun.com [192.5.209.72]) by mmp42es.mmp.us.syntegra.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-21683274 for psarc-ext@sun.com; Thu, 19 Mar 2009 16:00:47 +0000 (Z) Received: from yw-out-1718.google.com ([74.125.46.154] [74.125.46.154]) by relay4i.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-20173491 for psarc-ext@sun.com; Thu, 19 Mar 2009 16:00:47 +0000 (Z) Received: by yw-out-1718.google.com with SMTP id 4so423693ywq.68 for ; Thu, 19 Mar 2009 08:59:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.90.78.14 with SMTP id a14mr1487503agb.99.1237478397496; Thu, 19 Mar 2009 08:59:57 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 19 Mar 2009 08:59:55 -0700 From: John Plocher Subject: Re: 20 Questions # 5 update [PSARC/2009/179 FastTrack timeout 03/25/2009] In-reply-to: <18882.11618.834002.352851@gargle.gargle.HOWL> To: psarc-ext@sun.com Message-id: MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references :date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=oQG5OPyVG32HtY56RDhnfLMDWWh03c+z0TkQN3TnRVc=; b=rv8j3R4n2uJJoq22W5p4drX2aJrCnrayJ2ICzGMFl1zWRY4vAmMXAiDnWD9gkCjXYP fijthlhQ12or7j32rWN61J6YcwFm8GDd5JoCjQNFVdbIVlUlquldphoY7YOX7xNPLJDE JBlEOJf9n6vJD/EeCjW28tjlsVwxkfadpsKJ0= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=gwOTHTLpsMVtFuREUII3x5ktLc7xj96J4vq7FnMTdxumq9EH1K01AHAA0gUwBXSNnn fH+GFrVsmSRJsa0In7mpi0xs/ECVoQNifNVlG7Km2QrJuYoJX3oDh0jSRQfAFT/T83rV AXeTqA9cZzxfS4SPANk2J3J5L7kVK3KF4nuDE= X-PMX-Version: 5.4.1.325704 X-Brightmail-Tracker: AAAAAA== X-Antispam: No, score=-0.2/5.0, scanned in 0.056sec at (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smf-spamd v1.3.1 - http://smfs.sf.net/ References: <200903181852.n2IIqrWb011702@marduk.eng.sun.com> <49C21AE8.3030202@Sun.COM> <18882.11618.834002.352851@gargle.gargle.HOWL> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by sac.sfbay.sun.com id n2JG0sV3025242 Status: RO Content-Length: 1237 >> >     You could talk with the TX team. As with all the 20Qs, there is significant value in having something more than an open ended question that teams can't fully comprehend. Some sort of context (checklist, description, URL, Best Practice,...) so that the teams can say "hey, that sounds like something our stuff might or should do" rather than "No, we don't do {TX, branded zones, zones}, ignore the question - uhm, what is {TX, branded zones, zones}?". Even better would be some sort of "answer" - a "how to architect and design things so they play well with {TX, branded zones, zones}" document that teams can use to reduce the need for /everyone/ to interact with the {TX, branded zones, zones} team in order to get a clue. Without such a document to disseminate {TX, branded zones, zones}-clue, you can't expect teams to do anything to play well with {TX, branded zones, zones} - the default "ignore {TX, branded zones, zones} because it isn't obvious that it applies to us" pressure is too great. Even cryptic ARC 20Q references won't really change behaviors - although they will increase the tension and conflict that surfaces in ARC meetings as teams get blindsided with new-to-them undocumented requirements. -John From gww@sac.sfbay.sun.com Tue Mar 24 12:51:11 2009 Received: from sunmail4.singapore.sun.com (sunmail4.Singapore.Sun.COM [129.158.71.19]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n2OJpAOt021772 for ; Tue, 24 Mar 2009 12:51:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (nwk-avmta-2.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.145.155.6]) by sunmail4.singapore.sun.com (8.13.4+Sun/8.13.3/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id n2OJp6HP005469 for <@sunmail2sca.sfbay.sun.com:psarc-ext@sun.com>; Wed, 25 Mar 2009 03:51:09 +0800 (SGT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0KH10041L0H82T00@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com> for psarc-ext@sun.com (ORCPT psarc-ext@sun.com); Tue, 24 Mar 2009 12:51:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dm-sfbay-01.sfbay.sun.com ([129.145.155.118]) by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0KH100MXW0H72Z90@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com> for psarc-ext@sun.com (ORCPT psarc-ext@sun.com); Tue, 24 Mar 2009 12:51:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sac.sfbay.sun.com (sac.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.146.226.132]) by dm-sfbay-01.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id n2OJp6Wk026939; Tue, 24 Mar 2009 12:51:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sac.sfbay.sun.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n2OJp6r4021766; Tue, 24 Mar 2009 12:51:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from gww@localhost) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8/Submit) id n2OJp6oW021765; Tue, 24 Mar 2009 12:51:06 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 24 Mar 2009 12:51:06 -0700 (PDT) From: Gary Winiger Subject: Re: 20 Questions # 5 update [PSARC/2009/179 FastTrack timeout 03/25/2009] To: john.plocher@gmail.com, psarc-ext@sun.com Message-id: <200903241951.n2OJp6oW021765@sac.sfbay.sun.com> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN Content-transfer-encoding: 8BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.4.1.325704 Status: RO Content-Length: 2122 > >> >     You could talk with the TX team. > > As with all the 20Qs, there is significant value in having something > more than an open ended question that teams can't fully comprehend. > Some sort of context (checklist, description, URL, Best Practice,...) > so that the teams can say "hey, that sounds like something our stuff > might or should do" rather than "No, we don't do {TX, branded zones, > zones}, ignore the question - uhm, what is {TX, branded zones, > zones}?". We seemed to have gotten a discussion mostly around proposal 1. and TX specifically. Based upon both the comments in the mail log and out of band comments, I'd like to bring proposal 2 as my concrete proposal (an updated 20questions is in the case directory): 5. Projects need to be aware of the overall security of the system and how their components affect it. Which parts of this project are critical to the security of the system to avoid such unintended consequences such as unauthorized system entry, unauthorized access to or modification of | data, elevation of privilege, denial of service, violation of labeled | security, ...? Does this project require elevated privilege? A number of specific policies and practices address various aspects of the security of the system. They are found in appendix 1. Which of these are applicable to this project, and how are they addressed? Appendix 1. Security references + Labeled Security: + http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multilevel_security + See also PSARC/2002/762 Layered Trusted Solaris + http://opensolaris.org/os/community/arc/caselog/2002/762 Specifically to John's thoughtful comments, yes, projects can always ignore a question from ignorance and adding labeled security to the list of unintended consequences doesn't really change that. The previous for of question 5 presupposed understanding of a number of other security concepts. Case owners are ultimately responsible for helping/guiding projects understanding. Gary.. P.S. When the case log comes back on line, 2002/762 should be viewable. I've redacted it. From carlsonj@phorcys.east.sun.com Tue Mar 24 13:18:53 2009 Received: from sunmail5.uk.sun.com (sunmail5.UK.Sun.COM [129.156.85.165]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n2OKIq90025906 for ; Tue, 24 Mar 2009 13:18:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (nwk-avmta-2.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.145.155.6]) by sunmail5.uk.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id n2OKIo0W007225 for <@sunmail2sca.sfbay.sun.com:psarc-ext@sun.com>; Tue, 24 Mar 2009 20:18:52 GMT Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0KH1005011REL600@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com> for psarc-ext@sun.com (ORCPT psarc-ext@sun.com); Tue, 24 Mar 2009 13:18:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from phorcys.east.sun.com ([129.148.174.143]) by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0KH100MHJ1RD35A0@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com> for psarc-ext@sun.com (ORCPT psarc-ext@sun.com); Tue, 24 Mar 2009 13:18:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from phorcys.east.sun.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by phorcys.east.sun.com (8.14.3+Sun/8.14.3) with ESMTP id n2OKB7PA004174; Tue, 24 Mar 2009 16:11:07 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from carlsonj@localhost) by phorcys.east.sun.com (8.14.3+Sun/8.14.3/Submit) id n2OKB7Uv004171; Tue, 24 Mar 2009 16:11:07 -0400 (EDT) Date: Tue, 24 Mar 2009 16:11:07 -0400 From: James Carlson Subject: Re: 20 Questions # 5 update [PSARC/2009/179 FastTrack timeout 03/25/2009] In-reply-to: <200903241951.n2OJp6oW021765@sac.sfbay.sun.com> To: Gary Winiger Cc: john.plocher@gmail.com, psarc-ext@sun.com Message-id: <18889.15963.531724.733427@gargle.gargle.HOWL> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: VM 7.01 under Emacs 21.3.1 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.4.1.325704 References: <200903241951.n2OJp6oW021765@sac.sfbay.sun.com> Status: RO Content-Length: 1095 Gary Winiger writes: > + See also PSARC/2002/762 Layered Trusted Solaris > > + http://opensolaris.org/os/community/arc/caselog/2002/762 > > Specifically to John's thoughtful comments, yes, projects > can always ignore a question from ignorance and adding labeled > security to the list of unintended consequences doesn't really > change that. The previous for of question 5 presupposed > understanding of a number of other security concepts. Case owners > are ultimately responsible for helping/guiding projects > understanding. > > Gary.. > P.S. When the case log comes back on line, 2002/762 should be > viewable. I've redacted it. That link is actually now: http://arc.opensolaris.org/caselog/PSARC/2002/762/ Note that it's on a different host, and it works differently than it did in the past. The materials appear to be present and complete. -- James Carlson, Solaris Networking Sun Microsystems / 35 Network Drive 71.232W Vox +1 781 442 2084 MS UBUR02-212 / Burlington MA 01803-2757 42.496N Fax +1 781 442 1677 From gww@eng.sun.com Tue Mar 24 16:42:46 2009 Received: from newsunmail1brm.central.sun.com (newsunmail1brm.Central.Sun.COM [129.147.62.245]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n2ONgkYl005609 for ; Tue, 24 Mar 2009 16:42:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (nwk-avmta-2.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.145.155.6]) by newsunmail1brm.central.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.13.7/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id n2ONgjVL035358 for <@sunmail2sca.sfbay.sun.com:psarc-ext@sun.com>; Tue, 24 Mar 2009 17:42:46 -0600 (MDT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0KH100H0DB78HV00@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com> for psarc-ext@sun.com (ORCPT psarc-ext@sun.com); Tue, 24 Mar 2009 16:42:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dm-eng-02.sfbay.sun.com ([129.146.11.32]) by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0KH10083LB787FB0@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com> for psarc-ext@sun.com (ORCPT psarc-ext@sun.com); Tue, 24 Mar 2009 16:42:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from marduk.eng.sun.com (marduk.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.146.108.224]) by dm-eng-02.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id n2ONgh3j051152; Tue, 24 Mar 2009 16:42:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: from marduk.eng.sun.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by marduk.eng.sun.com (8.13.6+Sun/8.12.11) with ESMTP id n2ONhQTl019488; Tue, 24 Mar 2009 15:43:26 -0800 (PST) Received: (from gww@localhost) by marduk.eng.sun.com (8.13.6+Sun/8.12.11/Submit) id n2ONhQqQ019487; Tue, 24 Mar 2009 16:43:26 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 24 Mar 2009 16:43:26 -0700 (PDT) From: Gary Winiger Subject: Re: 20 Questions # 5 update [PSARC/2009/179 FastTrack timeout 03/25/2009] To: gww@sac.sfbay.sun.com, james.d.carlson@sun.com Cc: psarc-ext@sun.com Message-id: <200903242343.n2ONhQqQ019487@marduk.eng.sun.com> Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-Sun-Charset: US-ASCII X-PMX-Version: 5.4.1.325704 Status: RO Content-Length: 215 > That link is actually now: > > http://arc.opensolaris.org/caselog/PSARC/2002/762/ Thanks. I'll be sure to update the 20questions doc with proper links for all the current opensoaris.org references. Gary.. From gww@sac.sfbay.sun.com Wed Mar 25 12:54:26 2009 Received: from sunmail5.uk.sun.com (sunmail5.UK.Sun.COM [129.156.85.165]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n2PJsPxo023790 for ; Wed, 25 Mar 2009 12:54:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (brm-avmta-1.Central.Sun.COM [129.147.4.11]) by sunmail5.uk.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id n2PJsLni007337 for <@sunmail2sca.sfbay.sun.com:psarc-ext@sun.com>; Wed, 25 Mar 2009 19:54:25 GMT Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com by brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0KH200L11VAN7I00@brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com> for psarc-ext@sun.com (ORCPT psarc-ext@sun.com); Wed, 25 Mar 2009 13:54:23 -0600 (MDT) Received: from dm-sfbay-02.sfbay.sun.com ([129.146.11.31]) by brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0KH2001B5VAM6EE0@brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com> for psarc-ext@sun.com (ORCPT psarc-ext@sun.com); Wed, 25 Mar 2009 13:54:22 -0600 (MDT) Received: from sac.sfbay.sun.com (sac.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.146.226.132]) by dm-sfbay-02.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id n2PJsLSh028613; Wed, 25 Mar 2009 12:54:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sac.sfbay.sun.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n2PJsLSj023788; Wed, 25 Mar 2009 12:54:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from gww@localhost) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8/Submit) id n2PJsLBY023787; Wed, 25 Mar 2009 12:54:21 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 25 Mar 2009 12:54:21 -0700 (PDT) From: Gary Winiger Subject: Re: 20 Questions # 5 update [PSARC/2009/179 FastTrack timeout 03/25/2009] To: gww@sac.sfbay.sun.com, john.plocher@gmail.com, psarc-ext@sun.com Message-id: <200903251954.n2PJsLBY023787@sac.sfbay.sun.com> Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.4.1.325704 Status: RO Content-Length: 1049 > 5. Projects need to be aware of the overall security of the system and how > their components affect it. Which parts of this project are critical to > the security of the system to avoid such unintended consequences such > as unauthorized system entry, unauthorized access to or modification of > | data, elevation of privilege, denial of service, violation of labeled > | security, ...? Does this project require elevated privilege? > > A number of specific policies and practices address various aspects of > the security of the system. They are found in appendix 1. Which of > these are applicable to this project, and how are they addressed? > > Appendix 1. Security references > > + Labeled Security: > > + http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multilevel_security > > + See also PSARC/2002/762 Layered Trusted Solaris > > + http://opensolaris.org/os/community/arc/caselog/2002/762 This update to the 10(20) questions was approved at today's PSARC meeting with +1s from two committee members. Gary..