On Thursday 18 October 2007, Gene Heskett wrote: >On Thursday 18 October 2007, Andy Green wrote: >>Somebody in the thread at some point said: >>> Greetings; >>> >>> Running 2.6.23 here, on a AMD XP-2800, gig of ram, lots of drive. >>> >>> I thought maybe I should give selinux another chance here. So I removed >>> the selinux=0 in my grub.conf, and edited its .conf file in >>> /etc/sysconfig to set it for permissive. >>> >>> On the reboot, the relabel wasn't done, so I looked around and reset a >>> fresh /.autorelabel file and rebooted again. It was already present >>> however. >>> >>> This time it did a very short autorelabel, maybe 2 screens full and was >>> done in just a couple of seconds, at which point it went into yet another >>> reboot cycle making me think it was stuck in a loop or something. >> >>Sounds like you are going about it in a good way FWIW. >> >>> But the next reboot then had auditd advise me there was an error in line >>> 16 of /etc/audit/auditd.rules. >> >>That file looks like this here, in full: >> >># This file contains the auditctl rules that are loaded >># whenever the audit daemon is started via the initscripts. >># The rules are simply the parameters that would be passed >># to auditctl. >> >># First rule - delete all >>-D >> >># Increase the buffers to survive stress events. >># Make this bigger for busy systems >>-b 320 >> >># Feel free to add below this line. See auditctl man page >> >> >>Here's the state of the selinux packages here for reference >> >># rpm -qa | grep selinux >>libselinux-2.0.14-9.fc7 >>libselinux-python-2.0.14-9.fc7 >>selinux-policy-targeted-2.6.4-48.fc7 >>selinux-policy-2.6.4-48.fc7 >># rpm -qa | grep audit >>audit-libs-python-1.5.6-2.fc7 >>audit-libs-1.5.6-2.fc7 >>audit-1.5.6-2.fc7 > >All fc6 here, but uptodate. > >># chkconfig --list | grep audit >>auditd 0:off 1:off 2:on 3:on 4:on 5:on 6:off >> >>I would nuke the entries at the end of your /etc/audit/auditd.rules and >>retry. > >I'll give that a shot tomorrow, its getting sleepy out around here, 4am & > I've already lost any chance at beauty sleep, which wouldn't help at my age > anyway. :) > >>-Andy > >Thanks Andy. > Ok, up again, nuked a pint of coffee but its too hot yet. I commented that line 16 in audit.rules, and it moved the error to line 17, so I commented that one too. Step & repeat until there is only one active line in the file, line 15. -------------- # This file contains the auditctl rules that are loaded # whenever the audit daemon is started via the initscripts. # The rules are simply the parameters that would be passed # to auditctl. # First rule - delete all -D # Increase the buffers to survive stress events. # Make this bigger for busy systems -b 320 # Feel free to add below this line. See auditctl man page -a exit,always -S chroot #-a exit,always -S chdir -F obj_type=dhclient_t #-a exit,always -S chdir -F obj_type=sendmail_t #-a exit,always -S chdir -F obj_type=mcstransd_t #-a exit,always -S chdir -F obj_type=sshd_t #-a exit,always -S chdir -F obj_type=ntpd_t #-a exit,always -S chdir -F obj_type=samba_t #-a exit,always -S chdir -F obj_type=named_t #-a exit,always -S chdir -F obj_type=klogd_t #-a exit,always -S chdir -F obj_type=crond_t #-a exit,always -S chdir -F obj_type=httpd_t #-a exit,always -S chdir -F obj_type=auditd_t #-a exit,always -S chdir -F obj_type=portmap_t #-a exit,always -S chdir -F obj_type=syslogd_t ----------- Now it seems to me that those rules were there for a reason, and to have to comment all but the first one out to get rid of the error: --------- [root@coyote audit]# service auditd restart Stopping auditd: [ OK ] Starting auditd: [ OK ] Error sending add rule data request (Unknown error 524) There was an error in line 27 of /etc/audit/audit.rules [root@coyote audit]# vim audit.rules [root@coyote audit]# service auditd restart Stopping auditd: [ OK ] Starting auditd: [ OK ] ---------- isn't the real problem, so what do the experts here think? SELinux is running in permissive mode, and seems to be logging res=success for everything so far, so it may be possible to set it to targeted. I figured if I tried it on a known, fully working system, that would be a hell of a lot more accurate test than trying to make it work on a fresh install, which forced me to disable it months ago. Would it have logged res=denied for anything if set to permissive? -- Cheers, Gene "There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order." -Ed Howdershelt (Author) A Vulcan can no sooner be disloyal than he can exist without breathing. -- Kirk, "The Menagerie", stardate 3012.4 -- fedora-selinux-list mailing list fedora-selinux-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-selinux-list
