Jeff Johnson wrote:
Not so much irony as difficult coordination. Compiling "rpm_script_t" into rpm is
gonna be difficult coordination, and now that there are two behaviors, support
is gonna get messy too.
I'm open for better ideas, would like to have the choice of "rpm_script_t" exec type in libselinux
even though mechanism is of necessity in rpm.
How about a simple routine, I pass the interpreter (i.e. "/bin/sh" or "/sbin/ldconfig"), and
libselinux gives me the IDENTITY:ROLE:TYPE to set.
Even better, rpm will fork, then give libselinux argv[0] before doing execve. Then libselinux
can do whatever it wants.
You can have argv, not just argv[0] if you want too. ;-)
Better still, how about libselinux_execve() clone. no reason why libselinux should not do the execve as well afaict.
73 de Jeff
