On Wed, Jun 07, 2017 at 10:44:59AM -0600, Christian Ehrhardt wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 2, 2017 at 12:57 PM, Guido Günther <agx@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > Shouldn't this only be added when ceph is in use?
> > Cheers,
> > -- Guido
> >
>
> Yeah it is part of a category of rules where in a perfect world we would
> wirte virt-aa-helper code for each of them.
> In this particular case I think the existance of the following would be the
> trigger:
>
> <disk type='network'>
> [...]
> <source protocol="rbd"
>
> Yet for some cases - like this one - the "opening" we are doing in regard
> to apparmor is quite small and maybe the burden to create (and maintain) it
> in virt-aa-helper is too much.
>
> So I'd appreciate if that change could be considered as-is - otherwise
> please let me know - I'll then add it to a bunch of issues of the category
> "needs to be done in virt-aa-helper" which I already track.
I was uder the impression that ceph.conf might contain sensitive data
which we might not want to open up to all domains but looking at
http://docs.ceph.com/docs/jewel/rados/configuration/ceph-conf/
this does not seem to be the case so this is probably o.k.
CHeers,
-- Guido
--
libvir-list mailing list
libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list
