From: domg472@gmail.com (Dominick Grift)
To: refpolicy@oss.tresys.com
Subject: [refpolicy] [PATCH/RFC 0/19]: patch set to update the git reference policy
Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2011 16:59:47 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4D3DA1F3.7010705@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1295884566.1547.13.camel@tesla.lan>
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On 01/24/2011 04:56 PM, Guido Trentalancia wrote:
> Hello Dominick !
>
> On Mon, 24/01/2011 at 16.01 +0100, Dominick Grift wrote:
>> On 01/24/2011 01:43 AM, Guido Trentalancia wrote:
>>> Hello again !
>>>
>>> I am resubmitting the changes that I proposed a few days ago for the
>>> latest reference policy. There are a few additions and now the patch has
>>> been split into a set of 19 logical patches.
>>
>> I did a quick review of your policy and commented inline. I think most
>> of it is probably not acceptable at this point unfortunately.
>
> Yes, I have started to look at your comments. Of course they are all
> good points that you have made and that need to be changed.
>
> But after those issues will have been fixed, what else would prevent the
> patch from being committed ?
For example the way you deal with dbus chat, is not the way refpolicy
usually deas with it.
Where you have dbus_*_send interfaces that only go one way, refpolicy
uses dbus_*_chat interfaces that are bi-directional.
This is because if some process send a message and is allowed that, then
one can be sure that the receiving party will want to reply to that
message and that you will want to allow that reply (why else would you
have allowed the initial party to send a message in the first place?
>
>> It may be beneficial to get even more familiar with reference policy and
>> the concepts/security goals it uses.
>>
>> You may also find my latest screencast called: introduction to policy
>> writing, inspiring and hopefully informative:
>>
>> http://selinux-mac.blogspot.com/2011/01/yet-another-step-by-step-introduction.html
>
> I will have a look at it. Thanks again !
>
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>> Guido Trentalancia
>
>
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.16 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
iEYEARECAAYFAk09ofMACgkQMlxVo39jgT9rUwCeMlrUdoibLRXZDSxj2x+2ro3f
BQcAoM1XAUqXzgT8gDhkPJ7hDGhK2wZq
=rHvp
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-01-24 15:59 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-01-19 0:40 [refpolicy] RFC: patch to update git reference policy Guido Trentalancia
2011-01-20 13:18 ` Christopher J. PeBenito
2011-01-20 17:32 ` Guido Trentalancia
2011-01-21 12:37 ` Christopher J. PeBenito
2011-01-24 0:43 ` [refpolicy] [PATCH/RFC 0/19]: patch set to update the " Guido Trentalancia
2011-01-24 15:01 ` Dominick Grift
2011-01-24 15:56 ` Guido Trentalancia
2011-01-24 15:59 ` Dominick Grift [this message]
2011-01-24 21:01 ` Guido Trentalancia
2011-01-24 21:22 ` Dominick Grift
[not found] ` <4D471319.2000907@tresys.com>
2011-01-31 21:18 ` Guido Trentalancia
2011-02-02 23:52 ` Martin Orr
2011-02-03 0:04 ` Guido Trentalancia
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=4D3DA1F3.7010705@gmail.com \
--to=domg472@gmail.com \
--cc=refpolicy@oss.tresys.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.