From: sven.vermeulen@siphos.be (Sven Vermeulen) Date: Thu, 6 Feb 2014 12:47:03 +0100 Subject: [refpolicy] I would like to suggest that we remove the tmpfs_t and type alias them to tmp_t. In-Reply-To: <52F36FC1.4020001@redhat.com> References: <52F36FC1.4020001@redhat.com> Message-ID: To: refpolicy@oss.tresys.com List-Id: refpolicy.oss.tresys.com The shm you mention would be my only concern. I've thought about introducing an shm_t or so instead but found little value. Beyond that concern I'm OK with it. On Feb 6, 2014 12:19 PM, "Daniel J Walsh" wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > - From a security point of view, treating this differently has little > value in > my mind. I believe policy writers just write both rules in place. I guess > you could argue that combining them together would allow a domain to write > to > /dev/shm /tmp and /var/tmp and currently you could only write to one. > > What do people think about this? > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > Version: GnuPG v1 > Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ > > iEYEARECAAYFAlLzb8EACgkQrlYvE4MpobPhFwCg1IIHpepYnmNWIDXbmgKIk2sn > O4kAn2yMkxBzZ46bZ89nSffZvFDzhP7a > =aNMc > -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- > _______________________________________________ > refpolicy mailing list > refpolicy at oss.tresys.com > http://oss.tresys.com/mailman/listinfo/refpolicy > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://oss.tresys.com/pipermail/refpolicy/attachments/20140206/26fbdabc/attachment.html