Ben Hutchings:
> Yes, I now understand this. I'll add a Recommends: apparmor for the
> next upload so this broken configuration is less likely to occur.
Thanks!
Cheers,
--
intrigeri
On Sun, 2017-11-05 at 12:21 +0100, intrigeri wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Ben Hutchings:
> > My understanding was that enabling AppArmor shouldn't do very much
> > until a policy is loaded (which it won't be if you don't install the
> > userland tools). As you've found, that isn't entirely correct.
>
> Let
Hi,
Ben Hutchings:
> My understanding was that enabling AppArmor shouldn't do very much
> until a policy is loaded (which it won't be if you don't install the
> userland tools). As you've found, that isn't entirely correct.
Let me clear a potential misunderstanding:
- It *is* correct that the
Control: tag -1 serious
On Tue, 2017-10-31 at 17:21 +, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> On Tue, 2017-10-31 at 17:10 +0100, Christoph Anton Mitterer wrote:
> > The severity would have shown people which haven't upgraded, that there
> > are issues... :-(
> >
> >
> > On Tue, 2017-10-31 at 16:01 +, Be
On Tue, 2017-10-31 at 17:10 +0100, Christoph Anton Mitterer wrote:
> The severity would have shown people which haven't upgraded, that there
> are issues... :-(
>
>
> On Tue, 2017-10-31 at 16:01 +, Ben Hutchings wrote:
[...]
> > Applications built for Linux are unrelated to Linux? I don't th
The severity would have shown people which haven't upgraded, that there
are issues... :-(
On Tue, 2017-10-31 at 16:01 +, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> Although you can disable it (security=dac or apparmor=0) if you want.
Sure. I never said this wasn't possible.
> > While I'm usually in favour of a
Processing control commands:
> severity -1 important
Bug #880441 [src:linux] linux-image-4.13.0-1-amd64: silently enabled AppArmor
breaks other programs
Severity set to 'important' from 'critical'
> affects -1 tor
Bug #880441 [src:linux] linux-image-4.13.0-1-amd64: silently enabled AppArmor
brea
Control: severity -1 important
Control: affects -1 tor
On Tue, 2017-10-31 at 16:07 +0100, Christoph Anton Mitterer wrote:
> Package: src:linux
> Version: 4.13.10-1
> Severity: critical
> Justification: breaks unrelated software
>
> Apparently AppArmor was enabled per default in the last version.
Package: src:linux
Version: 4.13.10-1
Severity: critical
Justification: breaks unrelated software
Hi.
Apparently AppArmor was enabled per default in the last version.
While I'm usually in favour of anything that improves security
(leaving aside the question here whether SELinux wouldn't be the
9 matches
Mail list logo
