From: nicky726@gmail.com (Nicky726)
Date: Sat, 30 Jan 2010 20:02:16 +0100
Subject: [refpolicy] [PATCH 1/1] Added KDE and Konqueror policy. Made
	necessary changes in staff, unprivuser and unconfined,
	for it to work.
In-Reply-To: <mailman.1.1264874402.23822.refpolicy@oss.tresys.com>
References: <mailman.1.1264874402.23822.refpolicy@oss.tresys.com>
Message-ID: <201001302002.16539.Nicky726@gmail.com>
To: refpolicy@oss.tresys.com
List-Id: refpolicy.oss.tresys.com

Thanks for your comments, I'll provide a better patch soon. In the meantime 
just some notes and questions.
 
> > +# Temp acces for konqueror
> > +manage_dirs_pattern(konqueror_t, konqueror_tmp_t, konqueror_tmp_t)
> > +manage_lnk_files_pattern(konqueror_t, konqueror_tmp_t, konqueror_tmp_t)
> > +manage_sock_files_pattern(konqueror_t, konqueror_tmp_t, konqueror_tmp_t)
> > +manage_files_pattern(konqueror_t, konqueror_tmp_t, konqueror_tmp_t)
> 
> This does probably require the user to be able to manage it

What do you mean by this?

> > +        konqueror_role(staff_r, staff_t)
> > +')
> > +
> 
> Should probably go into userdomain (common use template), but i believe
> that for reference policy these calls are not required at all (gets
> called automatically)
> 
> > +        konqueror_role(user_r, user_t)
> > +')
> 
> Same as above
> 
> > +        konqueror_role(unconfined_r, unconfined_t)
> > +')
> > +
> 
> Not sure whether it is a good idea run let unconfined_t transition

Well I'm definitely confused about where to place these calls. Fedora has it 
somewhere, refpolicy elsewhere. Could somebody provide explanation about it?

> 
> > +HOME_DIR/\.kde/share/config/konq_history	--	gen_context(system_u:object_
> >r:konqueror_home_t,s0) +
> > +HOME_DIR/\.kde/share/config/konquerorrc		--	gen_context(system_u:object_
> >r:konqueror_home_t,s0) +
> > +HOME_DIR/\.kde/share/config/konqsidebartng.rc	--	gen_context(system_u:ob
> >ject_r:konqueror_home_t,s0) +
> > +HOME_DIR/\.kde/share/config/kuriikwsfilterrc	--	gen_context(system_u:obj
> >ect_r:konqueror_home_t,s0) +
> > +HOME_DIR/\.kde/share/apps/konqueror(/.*)?		gen_context(system_u:object_r
> >:konqueror_home_t,s0) +
> > +HOME_DIR/\.kde/share/apps/khtml(/.*)?			gen_context(system_u:object_r:ko
> >nqueror_home_t,s0)
> 
> Why not just kde_shared_home_t for everything in ~/.kde
> 

Well, I hope this policy to be just a first step in constructing policies for 
other KDE aplications, which I think should be also confined from each other, 
so that e.g. a weakness in KDE browser would not endager contacts in KDE mail 
client. 

> > +gen_tunable(konqueror_exec_bin_t, false)
> 
> This shouldnt be tunable

Hm, I made it tunable, because I didn't feel quite right to let konqueror run 
bin_t just because of some bug reporting tool. Maybe that was not good idea... 
Any special reasons why it sould not be tunable?

Thanx for your time,
Ondrej Vadinsk?

-- 
Don`t it always seem to go
That you don`t know what you`ve got
Till it`s gone.

		(Joni Mitchell)