[Bug 1226356] Re: explicit deny rules do not silence logging denials in dbus and mount rules

[Launchpad Bug Tracker]

This bug was fixed in the package dbus - 1.6.12-0ubuntu8

---------------
dbus (1.6.12-0ubuntu8) saucy; urgency=low

  * debian/patches/aa-kernel-compat-check.patch: Drop this patch. It was a
    temporary compatibility check to paper over incompatibilities between
    dbus-daemon, libapparmor, and the AppArmor kernel code while AppArmor
    D-Bus mediation was in development.
  * debian/patches/aa-mediation.patch: Fix a bug that resulted in all actions
    denied by AppArmor to be audited. Auditing such actions is the default,
    but it should be possible to quiet audit messages by using the "deny"
    AppArmor rule modifier. (LP: #1226356)
  * debian/patches/aa-mediation.patch: Fix a bug in the code that builds
    AppArmor queries for the process that is receiving a message. The
    message's destination was being used, as opposed to the message's source,
    as the peer name in the query string. (LP: #1233895)
  * debian/patches/aa-mediate-eavesdropping.patch: Don't allow applications
    that are confined by AppArmor to eavesdrop. Ideally, this would be
    configurable with AppArmor policy, but the parser does not yet support
    any type of eavesdropping permission. For now, confined applications will
    simply not be allowed to eavesdrop. (LP: #1229280)
 -- Tyler Hicks <tyhicks at canonical.com>   Fri, 04 Oct 2013 09:59:21 -0700

** Changed in: dbus (Ubuntu Saucy)
       Status: In Progress => Fix Released

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Foundations Bugs, which is subscribed to dbus in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1226356

Title:
  explicit deny rules do not silence logging denials in dbus and mount
  rules

Status in “apparmor” package in Ubuntu:
  In Progress
Status in “dbus” package in Ubuntu:
  Fix Released
Status in “apparmor” source package in Saucy:
  In Progress
Status in “dbus” source package in Saucy:
  Fix Released

Bug description:
  I have this rule in my profile:
    # We want to explicitly deny access to NetworkManager
    deny dbus (send)
         bus=system
         path=/org/freedesktop/NetworkManager,

  but with this rule, I still see these denials:
  Sep 17 01:03:02 ubuntu-phablet dbus[622]: apparmor="DENIED" operation="dbus_method_call"  bus="system" name="org.freedesktop.NetworkManager" path="/org/freedesktop/NetworkManager" interface="org.freedesktop.DBus.Introspectable" member="Introspect" mask="send" pid=3201 profile="net.launchpad.ubuntu-security.ubuntu-sdk-1310-api-demos_ubuntu-sdk-1310-api-demos_0.1" peer_pid=1154 peer_profile="unconfined"
  Sep 17 01:03:02 ubuntu-phablet dbus[622]: apparmor="DENIED" operation="dbus_method_call"  bus="system" name="org.freedesktop.NetworkManager" path="/org/freedesktop/NetworkManager" interface="org.freedesktop.NetworkManager" member="GetDevices" mask="send" pid=3201 profile="net.launchpad.ubuntu-security.ubuntu-sdk-1310-api-demos_ubuntu-sdk-1310-api-demos_0.1" peer_pid=1154 peer_profile="unconfined"

  Another one is this deny rule:
     deny dbus send bus=session
               interface="org.gnome.GConf.Server",

  with these denials:
  Sep 16 17:37:58 localhost dbus[16510]: apparmor="DENIED" operation="dbus_method_call"  bus="session" name="org.gnome.GConf" path="/org/gnome/GConf/Server" interface="org.gnome.GConf.Server" member="GetDefaultDatabase" mask="send" pid=15037 profile="net.launchpad.ubuntu-security.ubuntu-sdk-1310-api-demos_ubuntu-sdk-1310-api-demos_0.1" peer_pid=16736 peer_profile="unconfined"

  While this isn't a 'high' priority because the accesses are still
  being denied, it is a bug and the lack of silencing may cause
  confusion for users.

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/apparmor/+bug/1226356/+subscriptions