On Mon, Aug 28, 2006 at 02:05:50PM -0400, Linda Knippers wrote:
> Stephen Smalley wrote:
> > Using compat_net isn't difficult; it just requires reverting the change
> > to libselinux so that it won't be overwritten upon policy load, and then
> > putting something in your certification package to enable it manually,
> > most likely by echo'ing a 1 to /selinux/compat_net from rc.sysinit or
> > similar.  So that is certainly doable if you need it.
> 
> I didn't see any more mail on this subject but reverting the change
> to libselinux sounds like a good idea to me, even if we do include
> secmark in the LSPP evaluation.  If the default for the kernel parameter
> is to use secmark then the only people who have to worry about the
> setting are the ones who want legacy controls.  Having a way for them
> to turn it on without it being turned off again seems like a good
> idea.
> 

I agree.  There is no need to have compatibility code if it can't actually
be used.  And my preference would be to use compat_net for LSPP.  The better
solution would be to include secmark.  But doing so would be a significant hit
to test and documentation.  I am hoping to discuss at the meeting this
afternoon.

-- 
George Wilson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
IBM Linux Technology Center

--
redhat-lspp mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-lspp

Reply via email to