From: dac.override@gmail.com (Dominick Grift)
Date: Thu, 8 Dec 2016 12:21:36 +0100
Subject: [refpolicy] SELinux and IMA
In-Reply-To: <67130EC7AFA3FE4E9290B03665B351F407EFCF@SE-EX021.groupinfra.com>
References: <67130EC7AFA3FE4E9290B03665B351F407EFCF@SE-EX021.groupinfra.com>
Message-ID: <3c4ff434-ea54-d4c4-622f-3cada6dd7e24@gmail.com>
To: refpolicy@oss.tresys.com
List-Id: refpolicy.oss.tresys.com

On 12/08/2016 12:14 PM, Fakim, Walid wrote:
> Hi Both,
> 
> Can you briefly give me a few high-level points from your experience por favour?
> 

I do not have experience with IMA and so i cannot help with this.

> Thanks.
> 
> Best Regards,
> 
> Walid Fakim
> 
> From: Fakim, Walid
> Sent: 06 December 2016 22:50
> To: refpolicy at oss.tresys.com
> Subject: SELinux and IMA
> 
> Hi Guys,
> 
> Does anyone here have experience of using both SELinux & Integrity Measurement Architecture (IMA) on a target system? From my online reading, they perform different functions and achieve different security goals - how do they perform when used together?
> 
> Would be great to hear anyone's experience, good or bad.
> 
> Thanks.
> 
> Best Regards,
> 
> Walid Fakim
> 
> 


-- 
Key fingerprint = 5F4D 3CDB D3F8 3652 FBD8  02D5 3B6C 5F1D 2C7B 6B02
https://sks-keyservers.net/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x3B6C5F1D2C7B6B02
Dominick Grift

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 648 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : http://oss.tresys.com/pipermail/refpolicy/attachments/20161208/488b733f/attachment.bin