Re: GCL and SELinux: help requested

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Hello,

On Fri, Oct 20, 2017 at 2:12 PM, Lukas Vrabec <lvrabec@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

[snip]

>
> Hello community,
> We, as Red Hat SELinux team, apologise for recent delays with our answers to
> your requests and questions related to SELinux. We have been quite busy last
> couple of weeks so we decided to set a lower priority for Fedora work. We
> already responded and resolved what was needed and we are ready to react
> more flexibly in the future.
>
> Note: If you are interested in writing custom SELinux policy for your
> package, you can follow the
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/SELinux/IndependentPolicy documentation on
> wiki.
>

To update the tpm2-abrmd [0] package to the latest version, I need to
add a SELinux policy due recent upstream changes in the upstream
project. But after reading the documents referred in this thread, is
still not clear to me if the preferred method nowadays is to propose
adding the SELinux policy to the system wide selinux-policy package or
to ship a custom SELinux security module for the package.

> Regards,
> Lukas
>

[0]: https://github.com/intel/tpm2-abrmd

Best regards,
Javier
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx




[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Announce]     [Fedora Kernel]     [Fedora Testing]     [Fedora Formulas]     [Fedora PHP Devel]     [Kernel Development]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Maintainers]     [Fedora Desktop]     [PAM]     [Red Hat Development]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]
  Powered by Linux