From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Stephen Hemminger Subject: Re: Real networking namespace Date: Fri, 9 Oct 2009 19:08:20 -0700 Message-ID: <20091009190820.0a0f09c2@nehalam> References: <20091009083807.16e55b08@nehalam> <1255106246.2182.219.camel@moss-pluto.epoch.ncsc.mil> <1255106692.2182.224.camel@moss-pluto.epoch.ncsc.mil> <200910091812.16046.paul.moore@hp.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Stephen Smalley , linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org, Al Viro , netdev@vger.kernel.org, James Morris To: Paul Moore Return-path: In-Reply-To: <200910091812.16046.paul.moore@hp.com> Sender: linux-security-module-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org On Fri, 9 Oct 2009 18:12:15 -0400 Paul Moore 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? --