[Bug 876968] Re: host Apparmor rules are applied to guests in spite of guests loading new rules

2012-02-01 Thread Serge Hallyn
This is fixed in precise, as containers now start in their own domain which will not transition further (i.e. to libvirtd). ** Changed in: lxc (Ubuntu) Status: Confirmed => Fix Released -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Server Team, which is subscrib

[Bug 876968] Re: host Apparmor rules are applied to guests in spite of guests loading new rules

2011-10-18 Thread Serge Hallyn
** Changed in: lxc (Ubuntu) Status: New => Confirmed -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Server Team, which is subscribed to lxc in Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/876968 Title: host Apparmor rules are applied to guests in spite of guests loa

[Bug 876968] Re: host Apparmor rules are applied to guests in spite of guests loading new rules

2011-10-18 Thread John Johansen
>> 1. If the guest is to have its own policy, then the host needs to create >> a new policy namespace, and then it needs to transition the guest to the >> new namespace. Guest policy will then be loaded into the new namespace, >> and will not generally* conflict with system policy. > > That's great

Re: [Bug 876968] Re: host Apparmor rules are applied to guests in spite of guests loading new rules

2011-10-18 Thread Serge Hallyn
Quoting John Johansen (john.johan...@canonical.com): > Well I won't agree the guest shouldn't have its own policy (it depends > on your use case), but I do agree the host should be able to set a > domain to protect it self from the guest, but until AppArmor supports > policy stacking the solution i

[Bug 876968] Re: host Apparmor rules are applied to guests in spite of guests loading new rules

2011-10-18 Thread John Johansen
Well I won't agree the guest shouldn't have its own policy (it depends on your use case), but I do agree the host should be able to set a domain to protect it self from the guest, but until AppArmor supports policy stacking the solution is either or. The solution depends on what confinement is sou

[Bug 876968] Re: host Apparmor rules are applied to guests in spite of guests loading new rules

2011-10-17 Thread Serge Hallyn
Apparmor is MAC - in my opinion it's not valid to have a container guest specify its own policy. However, the container should be entering a domain which protects the host from the container, and in which executing any programs do not cause more domain transitions (unless specified by the containe

[Bug 876968] Re: host Apparmor rules are applied to guests in spite of guests loading new rules

2011-10-17 Thread Serge Hallyn
Assigning to jjohansen just to toss him a warning that I'm looking to talk to him at UDS :) Setting to medium priority because while 'a guest loading new rules' is invalid, host apparmor rules for daemons in the guest should not be applied. -- You received this bug notification because you are a

[Bug 876968] Re: host Apparmor rules are applied to guests in spite of guests loading new rules

2011-10-17 Thread Clint Byrum
-- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Server Team, which is subscribed to lxc in Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/876968 Title: host Apparmor rules are applied to guests in spite of guests loading new rules To manage notifications about this bug go t