Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of selinux-refpolicy-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
From:   Henrik Grindal Bakken <hgb@ifi.uio.no>
To:     Chris PeBenito <pebenito@ieee.org>
Cc:     selinux-refpolicy@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC] files: Make files_{relabel,manage}_non_security_types work on all file types
Organization: Sierra Fan Club
References: <20200117231500.59904-1-hgb@ifi.uio.no>
        <aee925e5-1a1f-1c97-71eb-669ff5890392@ieee.org>
        <875zh4aop3.fsf@cisco.com>
        <068afebc-bee1-0d1e-ed37-e1473f66f982@ieee.org>
Date:   Wed, 22 Jan 2020 21:24:01 +0100
In-Reply-To: <068afebc-bee1-0d1e-ed37-e1473f66f982@ieee.org> (Chris PeBenito's
        message of "Wed, 22 Jan 2020 05:03:06 -0500")
Message-ID: <87sgk78cke.fsf@cisco.com>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.2 (gnu/linux)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Sender: selinux-refpolicy-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

Chris PeBenito <pebenito@ieee.org> writes:

> On 1/21/20 9:06 AM, Henrik Grindal Bakken wrote:
>
>> Ok.  Then I would recomment rewriting the systemd_tmpfiles_t rules a
>> bit, because today it has a serious amount of AVC violations for pretty
>> standard usage.
>
> Perhaps.  However, it depends on what you consider standard usage.

I suppose.  It might not be standard out-of-the-distro-box, but it
supports managing all of these classes of files, and I would've
preferred my policy to support that.

>> There are no matching interfaces for lnk_files, at least.  Any
>> suggestions as to how to set up the tmpfiles rules?
>
> By adding new interfaces that are like the existing
> files_manage_non_security_files() interface, but for lnk_file.

Ok.  Is there interest in a patch for that, or should I just conjure up
something locally that works for me?

-- 
Henrik Grindal Bakken <hgb@ifi.uio.no>
PGP ID: 8D436E52
Fingerprint: 131D 9590 F0CF 47EF 7963  02AF 9236 D25A 8D43 6E52