[lkml]   [2007]   [Jun]   [6]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: [AppArmor 39/45] AppArmor: Profile loading and manipulation, pathname matching
    On Wed, Jun 06, 2007 at 09:26:26AM -0400, Stephen Smalley wrote:
    > On Mon, 2007-06-04 at 23:03 +0200, Andreas Gruenbacher wrote:
    > > On Tuesday 15 May 2007 11:20, Pavel Machek wrote:
    > > > Hi!
    > > >
    > > > > Pathname matching, transition table loading, profile loading and
    > > > > manipulation.
    > > >
    > > > So we get small interpretter of state machines, and reason we need is
    > > > is 'apparmor is misdesigned and works with paths when it should have
    > > > worked with handles'.
    > >
    > > I assume you mean labels instead of handles.
    > >
    > > AppArmor's design is around paths not labels, and independent of whether or
    > > not you like AppArmor, this design leads to a useful security model distinct
    > > from the SELinux security model (which is useful in its own ways). The
    > > differences between those models cannot be argued away, neither is a subset
    > > of the other, and neither is a misdesign. I would be thankful if you could
    > > stop spreading this lie.
    > I have a hard time distinguishing AppArmor's "model" from its
    > implementation; every time we suggest that one might emulate much of
    > AppArmor's functionality on SELinux (as in SEEdit), someone points to a
    > specific characteristic of the AppArmor implementation that cannot be
    > emulated in this manner. But is that implementation characteristic an
    > actual requirement or just how it happens to have been done to date in
    > AA? And I get the impression that even if we extended SELinux in
    > certain ways to ease such emulation, the AA folks would never be
    > satisfied because the implementation would still differ. Can we
    > separate the desired functionality and actual requirements from the
    > implementation specifics?

    That's a really good point, is there a description of the AA "model"
    anywhere that we could see to determine if there really is a way to
    possibly use the current SELinux internals to show this model to the


    greg k-h
    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    More majordomo info at
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2007-06-06 19:35    [W:0.021 / U:3.488 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site