Re: Proposed patch for libselinux

[Daniel J Walsh <dwalsh@redhat.com>]

Stephen Smalley wrote:

>On Fri, 2004-10-22 at 09:45, Daniel J Walsh wrote:
>  
>
>>Why is this not covered by the current checks of setting file context.  
>>I don't think this is a special case.
>>If a domain can setfilecon, they should be able to set it permanently
>>    
>>
>
>Debatable.  Today, a domain may be able to relabel files, but an
>explicit relabel of the filesystem will always override those settings,
>which may be exactly what you want if you are doing a major policy
>upgrade.  In general, one shouldn't be running setfiles on a system
>after installation except for major policy upgrades anyway.  Allowing a
>domain to opt-out of subsequent relabels by default is new
>functionality; I think it requires a separate permission from
>relabelfrom.
>
>  
>
>>setfileconfixed?
>>setfileconpermanent?
>>lockfilecon?
>>customizefilecon?
>>
>>I don't  care what we call it.
>>    
>>
>
>Do we think it possible that we may support other flags related to file
>contexts in the future?  If so, then perhaps this should be a general
>flags field associated with the file context with a
>setfileconflags(path, flags), getfileconflags(path, flags) API and a
>single flag defined initially for marking the context as explicitly
>customized.  
>
>  
>
That seems like a good idea.  But are are these different flags going to 
require different Access Controls?

Dan

--
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.