Darren,

Have your issues be sufficiently addressed?

Thanks,

John

Lin Ma wrote:
> Hi Darren,
> 
> Darren J Moffat wrote:
>> Section 4.11 Security Impact
>>
>> The interaction between "Primary Administrator" and "Console User" 
>> RBAC profiles is unfortunate.  This basically says to me that this 
>> doesn't actually work in a useful way given how OpenSolaris system 
>> initial user having having "Primary Administrator".   In my opinion 
>> that is a bad config but it wasn't one the ARC was asked to review nor 
>> it it for this case to fix (I believe the issue is being discussed 
>> elsewhere though). IIRC it was done before "Console User" existed.
> Agree.
> 
>> However the particular problem it causes 6749728 seems to be in scope 
>> for this case to resolve though and I think to approve this 
>> architecture it needs to be solved, or this case needs to be dependent 
>> on a case (or some other commitment) that we stop assigning "Primary 
>> Administrator" to the default user account.   The workaround of 
>> modifying the "Primary Administrator" profile isn't acceptable and 
>> will actually cause different problems.
> I personally prefer the later, make this case depend on a case like 
> "stop assigning 'Primary Administrator'", because gnome applications can 
> obtain root privileges easier with that profile. It isn't good. However 
> it looks like a long-term goal. So I think I should try to fix 6749728.
> 
> My request is 6749728 is very complex, I hope I can get approval and 
> integrate Brasero first and fix that bug later. I will remove the 
> workaround from this case, update it like:
> ---------------
> 
>   A not Privilege Awareness(NPA) command excuted by the user (who has
>   'Primary Administrator' profile) with gksu(1) will be matched
>   the line:
> 
>   Primary Administrator:suser:cmd:::*:uid=0;gid=0
> 
>   which will become a root process. This causes issue found in
>   CR#6749728 eject function doesn't work.
> 
> ---------------
> Is it OK?
>>
>> Please do not document the advice that the "Desktop CD User" be 
>> modified by an end system admin.  Instead document that they should 
>> create their own profile and assign that to users instead.  The 
>> reasons for this is that we do not have a good upgrade story for what 
>> happens when the system admin modifies profiles we deliver - it is 
>> made worse by the current lack of any upgrade of these in OpenSolaris 
>> IPS based systems - and is further complicated by the fact that the 
>> entries could be in a remote nameservice.
> OK, I will document that "If system admin wants give users who do not 
> have 'Console User' profile the ability to use Brasero, he need to 
> create a new profile to the users and assign a proper privileges to 
> Brasero in that profile." Is it OK?
> 
>> On the naming the "Desktop CD User" profile name should probably be 
>> CD/DVD/BlueRay which makes me thing it really should be "Desktop 
>> Removable Media User"
> While I'm not a native speaker, so I will always agree on the name changes.
> 
> lin

Reply via email to