lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2008]   [Mar]   [12]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    SubjectRe: [RFC][PATCH -v2] Smack: Integrate with Audit
    From
    On Wed, Mar 12, 2008 at 11:48:17AM -0400, Stephen Smalley wrote:
    >
    > On Wed, 2008-03-12 at 08:40 -0700, Casey Schaufler wrote:
    > > --- Stephen Smalley <sds@tycho.nsa.gov> wrote:
    > >
    > > >
    > > > On Wed, 2008-03-12 at 04:44 +0200, Ahmed S. Darwish wrote:
    > > > > Hi!,
    > > > >
    > > > > Setup the new Audit hooks for Smack. The AUDIT_SUBJ_USER and
    > > > > AUDIT_OBJ_USER SELinux flags are recycled to avoid `auditd'
    > > > > userspace modifications. Smack only needs auditing on
    > > > > a subject/object bases, so those flags were enough.
    > > >
    > > > Only question I have is whether audit folks are ok with reuse of the
    > > > flags in this manner, and whether the _USER flag is best suited for this
    > > > purpose if you are going to reuse an existing flag (since Smack label
    > > > seems more like a SELinux type than a SELinux user).
    > >
    > > To-mate-o toe-maht-o.
    > >
    > > There really doesn't seem to be any real reason to create a new
    > > flag just because the granularity is different. The choice between
    > > _USER and _TYPE (and _ROLE for that matter) is arbitrary from a
    > > functional point of view. I say that since Smack has users, but
    > > not types or roles, _USER makes the most sense.
    >
    > Perhaps I misunderstand, but Smack labels don't represent users (i.e.
    > user identity) in any way, so it seemed like a mismatch to use the _USER
    > flag there. Whereas types in SELinux bear some similarity to Smack
    > labels - simple unstructured names whose meaning is only defined by the
    > policy rules.
    >

    I think Casey meant the common use of Smack where a login program
    (openssh, bin/login, ..) sets a label for each user that logs in, thus
    letting each label effectively representing a user.

    In a sense, smack labels share a bit of _USER and _TYPE.

    > Regardless, it seems like the audit maintainers ought to weigh in on the
    > matter.
    >

    Indeed.

    Regards,

    --

    "Better to light a candle, than curse the darkness"

    Ahmed S. Darwish
    Homepage: http://darwish.07.googlepages.com
    Blog: http://darwish-07.blogspot.com



    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2008-03-12 17:51    [W:0.023 / U:0.064 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site