From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from goalie.tycho.ncsc.mil (goalie [144.51.242.250]) by tarius.tycho.ncsc.mil (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id t3SHJJv7021926 for ; Tue, 28 Apr 2015 13:19:26 -0400 Received: from int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.22]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id t3SHJOOf029117 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=FAIL) for ; Tue, 28 Apr 2015 13:19:24 -0400 Message-ID: <553FC119.50402@redhat.com> Date: Tue, 28 Apr 2015 19:19:21 +0200 From: Florian Weimer MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Miroslav Grepl , Daniel J Walsh , SELinux List Subject: Re: Impersonating a process for file creation purposes References: <552F80C8.9060809@redhat.com> <552FFA39.3030909@redhat.com> <553507A0.1050902@redhat.com> <553FBF96.8030309@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <553FBF96.8030309@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 List-Id: "Security-Enhanced Linux \(SELinux\) mailing list" List-Post: List-Help: On 04/28/2015 07:12 PM, Miroslav Grepl wrote: >> > > I would go with _raw interfaces how Stephen suggested above. Thanks. I think the current version is here: > Also we should take care about ABRT SELinux policy. See . As far as I understand it, with the current default behavior, an effective SELinux policy is difficult to write. -- Florian Weimer / Red Hat Product Security