[apparmor] [PATCH v3] Convert aa-status to Python

Seth Arnold seth.arnold at gmail.com
Tue May 31 08:16:31 UTC 2011


On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 5:37 PM, Marc Deslauriers
<marc.deslauriers at canonical.com> wrote:

Marc, thanks, I'm finally taking the time to give this a look, rather
than just commenting on the overall idea. :)

> +def cmd_enabled():
> +    '''Returns error code if AppArmor is not enabled'''
> +    if get_profiles() == {}:
> +        sys.exit(2)

I think this code makes the assumption that _no profiles loaded_ means
_not enabled_. AppArmor might be enabled but have no profiles loaded.
(One might wonder if AppArmor is _really enabled_ if it isn't confining
anything, but there's a big difference between "enabled but doing
nothing" and "module not loaded".)

Some other mechanism to report enabled / empty would be nice.

> +def cmd_profiled():
> +    '''Prints the number of loaded profiles'''
> +    profiles = get_profiles()
> +    sys.stdout.write("%d\n" % len(profiles))
> +    if profiles == {}:
> +        sys.exit(2)

Here, as well... incidentally, exiting with a status code seems a bit
abrupt for "no profiles loaded".

Some very dissapointing news:
http://docs.python.org/release/3.0.1/whatsnew/3.0.html#pep-3101-a-new-approach-to-string-formatting
The dirt-simple % format handling is being removed eventually. All these
nice simple % formats should be replaced with:

"{0}".format(len(profiles))

or

"{0} profiles are loaded.".format(len(profiles))

Sigh. I always thought the % operator was one of Python's nicest
features.

> +def cmd_enforced():
> +    '''Prints the number of loaded enforcing profiles'''
> +    profiles = get_profiles()
> +    sys.stdout.write("%d\n" % len(filter_profiles(profiles, 'enforce')))
> +    if profiles == {}:
> +        sys.exit(2)
> +
> +def cmd_complaining():
> +    '''Prints the number of loaded non-enforcing profiles'''
> +    profiles = get_profiles()
> +    sys.stdout.write("%d\n" % len(filter_profiles(profiles, 'complain')))
> +    if profiles == {}:
> +        sys.exit(2)
> +
> +def cmd_verbose():
> +    '''Displays multiple data points about loaded profile set'''
> +    global verbose
> +    verbose = True
> +    profiles = get_profiles()
> +    processes = get_processes(profiles)
> +
> +    stdmsg("%d profiles are loaded." % len(profiles))
> +    for status in ('enforce', 'complain'):
> +        filtered_profiles = filter_profiles(profiles, status)
> +        stdmsg("%d profiles are in %s mode." % (len(filtered_profiles), status))
> +        for item in filtered_profiles:
> +                stdmsg("   %s" % item)
> +
> +    stdmsg("%d processes have profiles defined." % len(processes))
> +    for status in ('enforce', 'complain', 'unconfined'):
> +        filtered_processes = filter_processes(processes, status)
> +        if status == 'unconfined':
> +            stdmsg("%d processes are unconfined but have a profile defined." % len(filtered_processes))
> +        else:
> +            stdmsg("%d processes are in %s mode." % (len(filtered_processes), status))
> +        # Sort by name, and then by pid
> +        filtered_processes.sort(key=lambda x: int(x[0]))
> +        filtered_processes.sort(key=lambda x: x[1])
> +        for (pid, process) in filtered_processes:
> +            stdmsg("   %s (%s) " % (process, pid))
> +
> +    if profiles == {}:
> +        sys.exit(2)

... and seeing this block repeated for each of the cmd_foo() handlers
makes me think that it should be handled outside of the individual
cmd_foo() functions themselves.

> +def get_profiles():
> +    '''Fetch loaded profiles'''
> +
> +    profiles = {}
> +
> +    if os.path.exists("/sys/module/apparmor"):
> +        stdmsg("apparmor module is loaded.")
> +    else:
> +        errormsg("apparmor module is not loaded.")
> +        sys.exit(1)

And if sysfs isn't loaded, or isn't mounted here? I wish we had a more
solid mechanism to determine if AppArmor is loaded.

> +    apparmorfs = find_apparmorfs()
> +    if not apparmorfs:
> +        errormsg("apparmor filesystem is not mounted.")
> +        sys.exit(3)

We _do_ pretty much need securityfs to be loaded, but this error message
doesn't help the user figure out how to do that. I suggest:

"Expected a securityfs filesystem to be mounted; /sys/kernel/security is common"

> +    apparmor_profiles = os.path.join(apparmorfs, "profiles")
> +    if not os.access(apparmor_profiles, os.R_OK):
> +        errormsg("You do not have enough privilege to read the profile set.")
> +        sys.exit(4)

Rather than exit, why not continue with the operations that _are_
allowed to the user? `ps auxwZ` contains a wealth of information
available to unprivileged users that the user might still wish to be
summarized.

> +    for p in open(apparmor_profiles).readlines():
> +        match = re.search("^([^\(]+)\s+\((\w+)\)$", p)
> +        profiles[match.group(1)] = match.group(2)
> +
> +    return profiles

This specifically is where I wish {} didn't mean two things. :)

> +def get_processes(profiles):
> +    '''Fetch process list'''
> +    processes = {}
> +    contents = os.listdir("/proc")
> +    for filename in contents:
> +        if filename.isdigit():
> +            try:
> +                for p in open("/proc/%s/attr/current" % filename).readlines():
> +                    match = re.search("^([^\(]+)\s+\((\w+)\)$", p)
> +                    if match:
> +                        processes[filename] = { 'profile' : match.group(1), \
> +                                                'mode' : match.group(2) }
> +                    elif os.path.realpath("/proc/%s/exe" % filename) in profiles:
> +                        # keep only unconfined processes that have a profile defined
> +                        processes[filename] = { 'profile' : os.path.realpath("/proc/%s/exe" % filename), \
> +                                                'mode' : 'unconfined' }
> +            except:
> +                pass
> +    return processes
> +
> +def filter_profiles(profiles, status):
> +    '''Return a list of profiles that have a particular status'''
> +    filtered = []
> +    for key, value in list(profiles.items()):
> +        if value == status:
> +            filtered.append(key)
> +    filtered.sort()
> +    return filtered
> +
> +def filter_processes(processes, status):
> +    '''Return a list of processes that have a particular status'''
> +    filtered = []
> +    for key, value in list(processes.items()):
> +        if value['mode'] == status:
> +            filtered.append([key, value['profile']])
> +    return filtered
> +

Both these beg for list comprehensions. I'll let you decide if you think
these are clearer or not:

def filter_profiles(profiles, status):
    '''Return a list of profiles that have a particular status'''
    l = [k for k,v in profiles.items() if v == status]
    l.sort()
    return l

def filter_processes(processes, status):
    '''Return a list of processes that have a particular status'''
    l = [[fn,stat['profile']] for fn,stat in processes.items() if
stat['mode'] == status]
    return l

> +def find_apparmorfs():
> +    '''Finds AppArmor mount point'''
> +    for p in open("/proc/mounts").readlines():
> +        if p.split()[2] == "securityfs" and \
> +           os.path.exists(os.path.join(p.split()[1], "apparmor")):
> +            return os.path.join(p.split()[1], "apparmor")
> +    return False
> +
> +def errormsg(message):
> +    '''Prints to stderr if verbose mode is on'''
> +    global verbose
> +    if verbose:
> +        sys.stderr.write(message + "\n")
> +
> +def stdmsg(message):
> +    '''Prints to stdout if verbose mode is on'''
> +    global verbose
> +    if verbose:
> +        sys.stdout.write(message + "\n")
> +
> +def print_usage():
> +    '''Print usage information'''
> +    sys.stdout.write('''Usage: %s [OPTIONS]
> +Displays various information about the currently loaded AppArmor policy.
> +OPTIONS (one only):
> +  --enabled       returns error code if AppArmor not enabled
> +  --profiled      prints the number of loaded policies
> +  --enforced      prints the number of loaded enforcing policies
> +  --complaining   prints the number of loaded non-enforcing policies
> +  --verbose       (default) displays multiple data points about loaded policy set
> +  --help          this message
> +''' % sys.argv[0])
> +
> +# Main
> +global verbose
> +verbose = False
> +
> +if len(sys.argv) > 2:
> +    sys.stderr.write("Error: Too many options.\n")
> +    print_usage()
> +    sys.exit(1)
> +elif len(sys.argv) == 2:
> +    cmd = sys.argv.pop(1)
> +else:
> +    cmd = '--verbose'
> +
> +# Command dispatch:
> +commands = {
> +    '--enabled'      : cmd_enabled,
> +    '--profiled'     : cmd_profiled,
> +    '--enforced'     : cmd_enforced,
> +    '--complaining'  : cmd_complaining,
> +    '--verbose'      : cmd_verbose,
> +    '-v'             : cmd_verbose,
> +    '--help'         : print_usage,
> +    '-h'             : print_usage
> +}
> +
> +if cmd in commands:
> +    commands[cmd]()
> +    sys.exit(0)
> +else:
> +    sys.stderr.write("Error: Invalid command.\n")
> +    print_usage()
> +    sys.exit(1)
> +

Ooooh, it'd sure be nice if these were easy to translate. :) I know the
Perl version wasn't i18ned, but it sure would be nice if Python's
gettext made it as easy...

Thanks again Marc!



More information about the AppArmor mailing list