From: Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@linux-foundation.org>
To: Paul Moore <paul.moore@hp.com>
Cc: Stephen Smalley <sds@tycho.nsa.gov>,
linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org,
Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
netdev@vger.kernel.org, James Morris <jmorris@namei.org>
Subject: Re: Real networking namespace
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 2009 19:08:20 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20091009190820.0a0f09c2@nehalam> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200910091812.16046.paul.moore@hp.com>
On Fri, 9 Oct 2009 18:12:15 -0400
Paul Moore <paul.moore@hp.com> wrote:
> On Friday 09 October 2009 12:44:52 pm Stephen Smalley wrote:
> > On Fri, 2009-10-09 at 12:37 -0400, Stephen Smalley wrote:
> > > On Fri, 2009-10-09 at 08:38 -0700, Stephen Hemminger wrote:
> > > > The existing networking namespace model is unattractive for what I
> > > > want, has anyone investigated better alternatives?
> > > >
> > > > I would like to be able to allow access to a network interface and
> > > > associated objects (routing tables etc), to be controlled by Mandatory
> > > > Access Control API's. I.e grant access to eth0 and to only certain
> > > > processes. Some the issues with the existing models are:
> > > > * eth0 and associated objects don't really exist in filesystem so
> > > > not subject to LSM style control (SeLinux/SMACK/TOMOYO)
>
> As Stephen points out, SELinux does have the ability to assign security labels
> to network interfaces, check out the 'semanage' command. A while back I wrote
> up something about the SELinux network "ingress/egress" access controls:
>
> * http://paulmoore.livejournal.com/2128.html
I was hoping to be able to not have inaccessible interfaces visible,
is it possible to not have interfaces show up in commands like:
ip link show
or sysfs?
--
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-10-10 2:08 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-10-09 15:38 Real networking namespace Stephen Hemminger
2009-10-09 16:37 ` Stephen Smalley
2009-10-09 16:44 ` Stephen Smalley
2009-10-09 22:12 ` Paul Moore
2009-10-10 2:08 ` Stephen Hemminger [this message]
2009-10-10 21:40 ` Paul Moore
2009-10-10 18:14 ` Casey Schaufler
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=20091009190820.0a0f09c2@nehalam \
--to=shemminger@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=jmorris@namei.org \
--cc=linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=paul.moore@hp.com \
--cc=sds@tycho.nsa.gov \
--cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).