[Dev] Setting Smack for Crosswalk processes

Rafał Krypa r.krypa at samsung.com
Wed Oct 29 17:55:10 GMT 2014


Hello,
The process of integration of Crosswalk with security-manager for proper handling of application privileges is ongoing. Lately it happened mostly on Crosswalk Github. Two patches are now pending:

https://github.com/crosswalk-project/crosswalk/pull/2397/
https://github.com/crosswalk-project/crosswalk/pull/2518/

There have been some concerns and issues that I'd like to discuss here. I have also some new questions about Crosswalk architecture and different kinds of processes.

As we agreed talked over several times, each app should have it's own render process and extension process, both run with application-specific Smack label. And there is the browser process, common for all apps of a single user. While setting Smack for EP is easy and already implemented in above
patch, doing this for RP isn't that simple.
If I understand it correctly from the Crosswalk point of view, RP is being created by underlying chromium components. It is by default "sandboxed" with seccomp2. The limits of that sandbox, once sealed, prevent Smack label change. Therefore crosswalk cannot call security-manager in the render
process to manipulate Smack. There have been voices that Smack cannot be setup for RP or that it's not necessary, because sandbox already provides isolation.
I have few concerns with that approach:
- The construction of Crosswalk sandbox should be investigated to check what it actually allows. It may or may not offer higher levels of isolation than Smack.
- Smack is supposed to be used for identification of application processes. If RP can access any process other than BP, then without proper Smack labeling the other process won't be able to securely identify the web application. Can we get a confirmation from Crosswalk developers that such
communication should not happen?
- Sandbox setup seems to be completely optional. If Crosswalk is unable to setup the sandbox (e.g. because kernel was compiled without seccomp2 feature), it continues to work without it. This makes the whole sandbox thing unacceptable as a replacement for "Smack sandboxing".


As for other questions about Crosswalk, I discovered two other kinds of processes that doesn't fit into (BP, RP, EP) categories:
- zygote - spawned from the BP, it seems to be the one forking render processes (not the BP itself)
- gpu-process - spawned from the BP, it doesn't seem to fork any other processes

So instead of single BP process per user, as I expected, there are three of them. Could some Crosswalk expert briefly explain their purpose? Because setting Smack label requires capabilities, all of these processes would be run privileged. If the zygote process is the one spawning render processes,
the other two actually don't need the capability and should probably be modified to drop them. More patches need to follow...


Best regards,
Rafal Krypa


More information about the Dev mailing list