On Tue, Aug 12, 2008 at 10:16:35AM -0400, Daniel J Walsh wrote:
> Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> > On Tue, Aug 12, 2008 at 09:54:23AM -0400, Daniel J Walsh wrote:
> >> Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> >>> On Tue, Aug 12, 2008 at 09:20:41AM -0400, Daniel J Walsh wrote:
> The experimenting I have done h
Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 12, 2008 at 09:54:23AM -0400, Daniel J Walsh wrote:
>> Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
>>> On Tue, Aug 12, 2008 at 09:20:41AM -0400, Daniel J Walsh wrote:
The experimenting I have done has been around labeling of the virt_image
and the process with mcs la
On Tue, Aug 12, 2008 at 09:54:23AM -0400, Daniel J Walsh wrote:
> Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> > On Tue, Aug 12, 2008 at 09:20:41AM -0400, Daniel J Walsh wrote:
> >> The experimenting I have done has been around labeling of the virt_image
> >> and the process with mcs labels to prevent one process f
Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 12, 2008 at 09:20:41AM -0400, Daniel J Walsh wrote:
>> James Morris wrote:
>>> On Tue, 12 Aug 2008, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
>>>
Do we instead add the info the udev rules, so when /dev is
populated at boot time by udev the device no
James Morris wrote:
> On Tue, 12 Aug 2008, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
>
>> Do we instead add the info the udev rules, so when /dev is
>> populated at boot time by udev the device nodes get the desired
>> initial labelling ? Or do we manually chcon() the device
>> a
On Tue, Aug 12, 2008 at 09:20:41AM -0400, Daniel J Walsh wrote:
> James Morris wrote:
> > On Tue, 12 Aug 2008, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> >
> >> Do we instead add the info the udev rules, so when /dev is
> >> populated at boot time by udev the device nodes get the desired
> >>
On Tue, 12 Aug 2008, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> Do we instead add the info the udev rules, so when /dev is
> populated at boot time by udev the device nodes get the desired
> initial labelling ? Or do we manually chcon() the device
> at the time we boot the VM ?
On Mon, Aug 11, 2008 at 12:17:48PM +1000, James Morris wrote:
> 4. Design Considerations
>
> 4.1 Consensus in preliminary discussion appears to be that adding
> MAC to libvirt will be the most effective approach. Support
> may then be extended to virsh, virt-manager, oVirt
This is to announce the formation of the sVirt project, which aims to
integrate SELinux and Linux-based virtualization (KVM et al).
The idea has been discussed a few times over the last year or so, and in
recent weeks, a few Fedora folk (such as Dan Walsh, Daniel Berrange and
myself) have put t
