[refpolicy] Contribute chrome (sandbox) policy from Fedora to Refpolicy.

[sven.vermeulen@siphos.be (Sven Vermeulen)]

On Fri, Jan 06, 2012 at 12:25:56PM -0500, Daniel J Walsh wrote:
> Please review and Ack.
[...]
> +########################################
> +## <summary>
> +##	Role access for chrome sandbox
> +## </summary>
> +## <param name="role">
> +##	<summary>
> +##	Role allowed access
> +##	</summary>
> +## </param>
> +## <param name="domain">
> +##	<summary>
> +##	User domain for the role
> +##	</summary>
> +## </param>
> +#
> +interface(`chrome_role_notrans',`

Since the module will be called chrome, I can imagine it wouldn't take long
before chrome is put in its own domain. For this reason, I'd try to keep the
_sandbox suffix wherever possible.

Perhaps chrome_role_notrans_sandbox ?

> +########################################
> +## <summary>
> +##	Role access for chrome sandbox
> +## </summary>
> +## <param name="role">
> +##	<summary>
> +##	Role allowed access
> +##	</summary>
> +## </param>
> +## <param name="domain">
> +##	<summary>
> +##	User domain for the role
> +##	</summary>
> +## </param>
> +#
> +interface(`chrome_role',`

chrome_role_sandbox

> +########################################
> +## <summary>
> +##	Dontaudit read/write to a chrome_sandbox leaks
> +## </summary>
> +## <param name="domain">
> +##	<summary>
> +##	Domain to not audit.
> +##	</summary>
> +## </param>
> +#
> +	gen_require(`
> +		type chrome_sandbox_t;
> +	')
> +
> +	dontaudit $1 chrome_sandbox_t:unix_stream_socket { read write };
> +')

I'm missing the interface call here.

chrome_dontaudit_rw_unix_stream_sockets_sandbox? 

> +ubac_constrained(chrome_sandbox_tmpfs_t)

I'm not certain, but if you mark this resource as ubac-constrained, doesn't
chrome_sandbox_t need to be marked as such as well? Same for
chrome_sandbox_nacl_t?

Wkr,
	Sven Vermeulen