[refpolicy] WARNING: at kernel/printk.c:430 do_syslog+0x40d/0x441()

[justinmattock@gmail.com (Justin P. Mattock)]

On 01/24/2011 01:03 PM, Dominick Grift wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On 01/24/2011 09:57 PM, Justin P. Mattock wrote:
>> On 01/24/2011 12:27 PM, Dominick Grift wrote:
>> On 01/24/2011 08:34 PM, Justin P. Mattock wrote:
>>>>> On 01/24/11 11:30, Justin P. Mattock wrote:
>>>>>> On 01/19/11 11:30, Justin P. Mattock wrote:
>>>>>>> On 01/19/11 11:23, Christopher J. PeBenito wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 01/19/11 13:06, Justin P. Mattock wrote:
>>>>>>>>> this is showing up with the latest kernel in enforcing mode..
>>>>>>>>> (I have not update the policy and/or selinux userspace)
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> [ 12.803882] type=1400 audit(1295457694.801:3): avc: denied { syslog
>>>>>>>>> } for pid=1540 comm="rsyslogd" capability=34
>>>>>>>>> scontext=system_u:system_r:init_t:s0
>>>>>>>>> tcontext=system_u:system_r:init_t:s0 tclass=capability2
>>>>>>>> [cut]
>>>>>>>>> when using audit2allow I get:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> allow init_t self:capability2 syslog;
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> which gives an error when trying to install the module, due to the
>>>>>>>>> policy not knowing what capability2 is
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> system is ubuntu maverick, if this is already in(refpolicy) then
>>>>>>>>> I'll
>>>>>>>>> pull the latest when I get a chance..
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Support for this capability is upstream in refpolicy.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> well... after building and trying to install, seems I need to do this:
>>>>>>
>>
>> instead add this to policy/modules/services/apm.te:
>>
>> domain_mmap_low(apmd_t)
>>
>>
>>> just added this, and now I can build all the way through...
>>
>> and set boolean: mmap_low_allowed to on to allow apmd_t to mmap low if
>> needed
>>
>> note though that toggling this boolean also allow wine and
>> "whatsitsname" to mmap low.
>>
>>
>>> not sure.. this was hitting on a fresh build of the policy no modules or
>>> avc's being added yet(stock policy)
>
> stock refpolicy? i am looking at it right now and it has no such rule in
> there... so i dont know where this came from.
>

hmm... well I have loaded the policy from oct(not sure if this is in 
there), then with the new policy make install, make load(then I hit)
maybe some kind of leak or something from the old policy since I have 
not rebooted

Justin P. Mattock