e:
01/16/2009 10:57 AM
Subject:
Re: [libvirt] Fine grained Access Control in libVirt
On Fri, Jan 16, 2009 at 12:16:10PM +0900, Atsushi SAKAI wrote:
> Hi, Dan
>
> Would you explain the difference with sVirt?
> The final goal sVirt seems same form me.
> (for example, define many sec
On Fri, Jan 16, 2009 at 12:16:10PM +0900, Atsushi SAKAI wrote:
> Hi, Dan
>
> Would you explain the difference with sVirt?
> The final goal sVirt seems same form me.
> (for example, define many security domain etc in .te file.)
At this stage sVirt is primarily about protecting guests from
each oth
Hi, Dan
Would you explain the difference with sVirt?
The final goal sVirt seems same form me.
(for example, define many security domain etc in .te file.)
Or it just a little changes from sVirt implementation?
Thanks
Atsushi SAKAI
"Daniel P. Berrange" wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 15, 2009 at 02:39:20
On Thu, Jan 15, 2009 at 02:39:20PM +0100, Konrad Eriksson1 wrote:
> After some background research it doesn't look like anyone have taken on
> the task yet to add fine-grained access control to libVirt (only option
> right now is R/W or RO mode).
>
> Desired is an addition to libVirt that enable
On Thu, Jan 15, 2009 at 02:39:20PM +0100, Konrad Eriksson1 wrote:
> When looking at the libvirt core and driver framework it seems promising
> to inject these kind of call-out hooks either in libvirt.c or between
> libvirt.c and the underlying drivers, by doing this AC will be enforced
> indepen
Hi,
After some background research it doesn't look like anyone have taken on
the task yet to add fine-grained access control to libVirt (only option
right now is R/W or RO mode).
Desired is an addition to libVirt that enables access control on
individual actions and data that can be accessed t
