From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Mon, 2 Jun 2003 20:11:18 +0200 From: Tom To: Daniel J Walsh Cc: SELinux@tycho.nsa.gov Subject: Re: Default Policy question? Message-ID: <20030602201118.K2944@lemuria.org> References: <3EDB7585.8050308@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <3EDB7585.8050308@redhat.com>; from dwalsh@redhat.com on Mon, Jun 02, 2003 at 12:04:21PM -0400 Sender: owner-selinux@tycho.nsa.gov List-Id: selinux@tycho.nsa.gov On Mon, Jun 02, 2003 at 12:04:21PM -0400, Daniel J Walsh wrote: > Has anyone discussed the problem of having root be a member of the > sysadm_r role. I think it was mentioned on this list, yes. In fact, I've made it a habit to remove root from sysadm_r. > Is there a way to define policy such that you could > allow a sysadmin to manipulate configuration without allowing them to > effect policy? Ie, does the default policy allow someone the ability to > change the /etc/printcap file but not run load_policy? Yes, it does. The policy files have their own types, so it would be easy to restrict them more than normal config files. In fact, many config files have their own types as well, so you can seperate different applications and have different admins for them. > Should we have three levels of user by default. More :) I've just started working on something. I will likely post a proposal in a couple of days. If you want to work with me on this, just yell. -- http://web.lemuria.org/pubkey.html pub 1024D/2D7A04F5 2002-05-16 Tom Vogt Key fingerprint = C731 64D1 4BCF 4C20 48A4 29B2 BF01 9FA1 2D7A 04F5 -- This message was distributed to subscribers of the selinux mailing list. If you no longer wish to subscribe, send mail to majordomo@tycho.nsa.gov with the words "unsubscribe selinux" without quotes as the message.