I'm no fan of initramfs. All my systems boot up just fine without it, so I often see it as an additional layer of obfuscation. But there are definitely cases where initramfs is needed, and from the looks of it, we might be needing to push out some documentation and support for initramfs. Since my primary focus is to look at a hardened system, I started playing with initramfs together with Gentoo Hardened, grSecurity and SELinux. And what a challenge it was...

But first, a quick introduction to initramfs. The Linux kernel supports initrd images for quite some time. These images are best seen as loopback-mountable images containing a whole file system that the Linux kernel boots as the root device. On this initrd image, a set of tools and scripts then prepare the system and finally switch towards the real root device. The initrd feature was often used when the root device is a network-mounted location or on a file system that requires additional activities (like an encrypted file system or even on LVM. But it also had some difficulties with it.

Using a loopback-mountable image means that this is seen as a full device (with file system on it), so the Linux kernel also tries caching the files on it, which leads to some unwanted memory consumption. It is a static environment, so it is hard to grow or shrink it. Every time an administrator creates an initrd, he needs to carefully design (capacity-wise) the environment not to request too much or too little memory.

Enter initramfs. The concept is similar: an environment that the Linux kernel boots as a root device which is used to prepare for booting further from the real root file systems. But it uses a different approach. First of all, it is no longer a loopback-mountable image, but a cpio archive that is used on a tmpfs file system. Unlike initrd, tmpfs can grow or shrink as necessary, so the administrator doesn't need to plan the capacity of the image. And because it is a tmpfs file system, the Linux kernel doesn't try to cache the files in memory (as it knows they already are in memory).

There are undoubtedly more advantages to initramfs, but let's stick to the primary objective of this post: talk about its implementation on a hardened system.

I started playing with dracut, a tool to create initramfs archives which is seen as a widely popular implementation (and suggested on the gentoo development mailinglist). It uses a simple, modular approach to building initramfs archives. It has a base, which includes a small init script and some device handling (based on udev), and modules that you can add depending on your situation (such as adding support for RAID devices, LVM, NFS mounted file systems etc.)

On a SELinux system (using a strict policy, enforcing mode) running dracut in the sysadm_t domain doesn't work, so I had to create a dracut_t domain (which has been pushed to the Portage tree yesterday). But other than that, it is for me sufficient to call dracut to create an initramfs:

# dracut -f "" 3.1.6-hardened

My grub then has an additional set of lines like so:

title Gentoo Linux Hardened (initramfs)
root (hd0,0)
kernel /boot/vmlinuz-3.1.6-hardened root=/dev/vda1 console=ttyS0 console=tty0
initrd /boot/initramfs-3.1.6-hardened.img

Sadly, the bugger didn't boot. The first problem I hit was that the Linux kernel I boot has chroot restrictions in it (grSecurity). These restrictions further tighten chroot environments so that it is much more difficult to "escape" a chroot. But dracut, and probably all others, use chroot to further prepare the bootup and eventually switch to the chrooted environment to boot up further. Having the chroot restrictions enabled effectively means that I cannot use initramfs environments. To work around, I enabled sysctl support for all the chroot restrictions and made sure that their default behavior is to be disabled. Then, when the system boots up, it enables the restrictions later in the boot process (through the sysctl.conf settings) and then locks these settings (thanks to grSecurity's grsec_lock feature) so that they cannot be disabled anymore later.

But no, I did get further, up to the point that either the openrc init is called (which tries to load in the SELinux policy and then breaks) or that the initramfs tries to load the SELinux policy - and then breaks. The problem here is that there is too much happening before the SELinux policy is loaded. Files are created (such as device files) or manipulated, chroots are prepared, udev is (temporarily) ran, mounts are created, ... all before a SELinux policy is loaded. As a result, the files on the system have incorrect contexts and the moment the SELinux policy is loaded, the processes get denied all access and other privileges they want against these (wrongly) labeled files. And since after loading the SELinux policy, the process runs in kernel_t domain, it doesn't have the privileges to relabel the entire system, let alone call commands.

This is currently where I'm stuck. I can get the thing boot up, if you temporarily work in permissive mode. When the openrc init is eventually called, things proceed as usual and the moment udev is started (again, now from the openrc init) it is possible to switch to enforcing mode. All processes are running by then in the correct domain and there do not seem to be any files left with wrong contexts (since the initramfs is not reachable anymore and the device files in /dev are now set again by udev which is SELinux aware.

But if you want to boot up in enforcing straight away, there are still things to investigate. I think I'll need to put the policy in the initramfs as well (which has the huge downside that every update on the policy requires a rebuild of the initramfs as well). In that case I can load the policy early up the chain and have the initramfs work further running in an enforced situation. Or I completely regard the initramfs as an "always trusted" environment and wait for openrc's init to load the SELinux policy. In that case, I need to find a way to relabel the (temporarily created) /dev entries (like console, kmsg, ...) before the policy is loaded.

Definitely to be continued...


To comment as a guest, use "Or sign up with disqus" and then select the "I'd rather post as guest" option.

comments powered by Disqus