[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1228419142.11091.90.camel@moss-spartans.epoch.ncsc.mil>
Date: Thu, 04 Dec 2008 14:32:21 -0500
From: Stephen Smalley <sds@...ho.nsa.gov>
To: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc: adobriyan@...il.com, auke-jan.h.kok@...el.com,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org, e1000-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, ebiederm@...ssion.com, jmorris@...ei.org,
eparis@...isplace.org
Subject: Re: [E1000-devel] networking probs in next-20081203
On Thu, 2008-12-04 at 10:21 -0800, David Miller wrote:
> From: Stephen Smalley <sds@...ho.nsa.gov>
> Date: Thu, 04 Dec 2008 13:11:20 -0500
>
> > On Thu, 2008-12-04 at 20:52 +0300, Alexey Dobriyan wrote:
> > > On Thu, Dec 04, 2008 at 09:41:24AM -0800, Kok, Auke wrote:
> > > > maybe try disabling selinux?
> > >
> > > This will work. :^)
> >
> > SELinux didn't change here. /proc/net did.
>
> We've been through this before...
Yep, and we altered SELinux so that they could freely change proc
directories into symlinks to support the earlier proc/net change. But
now proc/net has turned into its own separate filesystem, with its own
filesystem type, which is unknown to SELinux. Thus causing it to be
left unlabeled and inaccessible to confined domains.
> And it is a usability issue that people can't change how procfs
> directories work without requiring the user to update their selinux
> policies first.
Introducing a new filesystem type (proc/net) without teaching SELinux
how to handle it is always going to produce denials on accessing that
filesystem. If they left the filesystem type string as "proc" it
wouldn't be a problem. Or they can adjust the SELinux code to
automagically handle it. Regardless, we didn't break anything.
--
Stephen Smalley
National Security Agency
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists