2008/7/17 Andrew Bartlett <abartlet@xxxxxxxxx>: > On Fri, 2008-07-18 at 09:00 +1000, Dave Airlie wrote: >> On Thu, 2008-07-17 at 17:57 -0500, Arthur Pemberton wrote: >> > On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 5:53 PM, Dave Airlie <airlied@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> > > kerneloops does it right, opt in, send somewhere useful, next step if >> > > somewhere useful has seen the AVC and we knows its safe, maybe send >> > > something back saying continue and ignore, but don't involve the user in >> > > the mess other than asking for opt-in. >> > >> > This may be a good idea. Have the service make a decision to continue >> > deny on temporarily allow based on available knowledge from the >> > server. >> > >> > How much private info if any would be in the average AVC? >> >> Good point I am reminded of some of those totem backtraces with porn >> movies in the backtrace :) > > Perhaps flag backtraces including files covered by (Fedora) RPMs > differently to backtraces that reference user files (and specific other > files, like .xsession-errors)? > > (and yes, I realise this might be difficult to do, but is probably the > only sane line between private and not-so-private files on a system). By backtrace I'm assuming you mean AVC. Finding an RPM file is as easy as `rpm -qf` so that's probably a good idea. -- Fedora 7 : sipping some of that moonshine ( www.pembo13.com ) -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
