From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Paul Moore To: Stephen Smalley Subject: Re: Time to remove compat_net? Date: Thu, 30 Aug 2007 16:33:33 -0400 Cc: selinux@tycho.nsa.gov, Eric Paris , Karl MacMillan , James Morris References: <200708301607.42110.paul.moore@hp.com> <1188504744.26572.361.camel@moss-spartans.epoch.ncsc.mil> In-Reply-To: <1188504744.26572.361.camel@moss-spartans.epoch.ncsc.mil> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Message-Id: <200708301633.33632.paul.moore@hp.com> Sender: owner-selinux@tycho.nsa.gov List-Id: selinux@tycho.nsa.gov On Thursday, August 30 2007 4:12:24 pm Stephen Smalley wrote: > On Thu, 2007-08-30 at 16:07 -0400, Paul Moore wrote: > > Does anyone have any objections to placing the compat_net code on the > > kernel's "feature removal schedule" (I'd go for removal in 2/2008, six > > months from now)? SECMARK can do everything that the older compat_net > > controls can do, and it does it with less overhead and a cleaner > > implementation. > > I'd be happy to see it go (conditional checks considered harmful), but a > good starting point would be to get secmark turned on in Fedora (it was > still off last I looked) and verify that nothing breaks. > > We also don't have any tools capable of managing secmark today; with the > legacy controls, we could labels ports and netifs via semanage. Only > secmark userland integration to date has been the basic iptables command > line support. Okay RedHat guys ... are there any plans to migrate semanage over to using the SECMARK controls? If not, what do you need (besides patches to semanage) to make the transition? -- paul moore linux security @ hp -- 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.