From: domg472@gmail.com (Dominick Grift)
Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2011 22:01:02 +0100
Subject: [refpolicy] [PATCH/RFC 15/19]: patch set to update the git
 reference policy
In-Reply-To: <1295902456.31686.17.camel@tesla.lan>
References: <1295829871.3862.74.camel@tesla.lan> <4D3D8545.30607@gmail.com>
	<1295902456.31686.17.camel@tesla.lan>
Message-ID: <4D3DE88E.9080900@gmail.com>
To: refpolicy@oss.tresys.com
List-Id: refpolicy.oss.tresys.com

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 01/24/2011 09:54 PM, Guido Trentalancia wrote:
> On Mon, 24/01/2011 at 14.57 +0100, Dominick Grift wrote:
>> On 01/24/2011 01:44 AM, Guido Trentalancia wrote:
>>> diff -pruN -x .git -x booleans.conf -x corenetwork.if -x corenetwork.te -x modules.conf refpolicy-git-18012011/policy/modules/system/selinuxutil.te refpolicy-git-18012011-new/policy/modules/system/selinuxutil.te
>>> --- refpolicy-git-18012011/policy/modules/system/selinuxutil.te	2011-01-17 19:36:10.814131755 +0100
>>> +++ refpolicy-git-18012011-new/policy/modules/system/selinuxutil.te	2011-01-23 04:14:02.662963912 +0100
>>> @@ -444,6 +444,7 @@ files_read_etc_files(semanage_t)
>>>  files_read_etc_runtime_files(semanage_t)
>>>  files_read_usr_files(semanage_t)
>>>  files_list_pids(semanage_t)
>>> +files_search_default(semanage_t)
>>
>> There should not be any default_t directories. Thus this shouldnt be
>> allowed.
> 
> This stems from the fact that at some point I came to a state where
> while working from the terminal (as opposed to working from a graphical
> terminal), semanage had trouble dealing with some temporary local
> modules that I was working with for testing purposes (they were labelled
> default_t)...
> 
> Of course it can be removed. So, in general default_t should never
> appear anywhere in the policy ? Just for curiosity, what is the reason
> behind that ? If it is allowed to carry out operations on usr and
> etc_runtime files, why shouldn't it allowed to carry out operations on
> default_t ?

locations unknown to selinux are labelled default_t. So for example if
you create a dir named /test in the root of the filesystem. There is no
file context specification for it and thus selinux labels it default_t.

Basically it signals some incompatibility in that sense because files
always need a label, and this should not happen.

Why should refpolicy support a scenario that should never happen in the
first place? default_t is not like other types like usr_t or
etc_runtime_t. types like file_t, default_t, unlabeled_t all signal some
other issues. I think this is discussed in "Fedora SELinux user guide"
(you can find it with google, its a free document.

> Regards,
> 
> Guido
> 

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.16 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iEYEARECAAYFAk096I4ACgkQMlxVo39jgT9q3wCcCIsGquSkb+NWEdXA3Dn1FCEc
xMYAn0PcLCUxsHvl4olv4Su7/qXlkjL0
=xdPO
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----