Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of selinux-refpolicy-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Subject: Re: [RFC] Purging dead modules
To:     Topi Miettinen <toiwoton@gmail.com>,
        Russell Coker <russell@coker.com.au>,
        Dominick Grift <dominick.grift@defensec.nl>
Cc:     refpolicy <selinux-refpolicy@vger.kernel.org>
References: <352607e8-2de0-fc71-8403-15942d65c837@ieee.org>
 <ypjl35z7fqf0.fsf@defensec.nl> <3283555.42QHSe7XtN@liv>
 <d138760c-2993-2079-c847-d7465fae2f7a@gmail.com>
From:   Chris PeBenito <pebenito@ieee.org>
Message-ID: <86e9b2ce-22ab-3de2-25f9-8e2f485e88c8@ieee.org>
Date:   Wed, 13 Jan 2021 08:21:49 -0500
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/78.6.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <d138760c-2993-2079-c847-d7465fae2f7a@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Precedence: bulk

On 1/11/21 6:52 PM, Topi Miettinen wrote:
> On 11.1.2021 17.48, Russell Coker wrote:
>> On Tuesday, 12 January 2021 2:23:47 AM AEDT Dominick Grift wrote:
>>>> I'm looking to remove modules for dead programs, such as hal and
>>>> consolekit. The question is how long to keep modules for dead
>>>> programs?  I'm thinking something like 3-5 years.
>>>
>>> Agree
>>
>> I think we should drop them when the programs aren't in the latest DEVELOPMENT
>> versions of Fedora, Debian, or any other distribution that supports SE Linux.
> 
> I think this could be automated. If no file contexts in a module match any files 
> in a list of all files of all packages of the selected distros concatenated, the 
> module is probably obsolete (which could be also verified by looking at old 
> releases) or it's for 3rd party software (never found in earlier distro 
> releases). I tried to do this locally to disable unused modules, but it took way 
> too long time with shell scripts. I suppose with a database or other proper 
> tools it would be trivial.

This is a good idea, but may be a problem for the Gentoo guys.

I'd probably simplify it to only looking at labels for executables, since a 
package's manifest might not hit all of the data files' entries.

-- 
Chris PeBenito