On Tue, 2010-10-12 at 11:01 -0400, Daniel J Walsh wrote: > On 10/09/2010 11:30 AM, Dominick Grift wrote: > > On Sat, Oct 09, 2010 at 09:14:25AM -0400, Eric Paris wrote: > >> On Sat, 2010-10-09 at 11:43 +0200, Dominick Grift wrote: > >>> Why is /dev/hugepages specified to be labeled hugetlbfs_t? Any > >>> particular reason for this? > >>> > >>> In my branch i labelled it device_t like most directories in /dev. > >>> > >>> This makes it easier because udev does some magic > >>> in /lib/udev/devices(hugetables) which causes all kinds of extra > >>> denials if i label the hugepages dir hugetlbfs_t. > >>> > >>> For example hugetlbfs_t must associate to device_t etc. Much easier to > >>> just label hugepages directories at both /dev/hugepage > >>> and /lib/udev/devices/hugepages device_t. > >>> > >>> Also i noticed that /sys/fs/cgroup is specified to be labeled > >>> cgroup_t, but i think the kernel creates that directory with type > >>> sysfs_t. So that would mean that it needs to be restored at each > >>> boot-up. > >> > >> /dev/hugepages and (I think) /sys/fs/cgroup are filesystem mount points > >> not actually files in the devfs or sysfs filesystem. So the labels are > >> picked probably picked up from the filesystem labeling rules at mount > >> time rather than from a later restorecon. > > > > In my branch i have the directory /dev/hugepages set to device_t and this location is labelled properly (udev or dracut did it?) > > Unlike /sys/fs/cgroup directory which is set to cgroup_t but this location is not labelled properly (sysfs_t instead of specified cgroup_t) > > > >> > >> As to whether we need or want such labels on hugetlbfs and cgroupfs I'll > >> let you and Dan argue about :) > I think the problem is running tools like restorecon on /dev to check > labels. ends up generating errors when hugetlbfs and cgroupfs are > mounted. I guess we could change the label to <<none>> > > /dev/shm has the same problem. > > matchpathcon /dev/shm > /dev/shm system_u:object_r:tmpfs_t:s0 But isn't /dev/shm just a normal tmpfs, not a special FS like cgroupfs or hugepagefs? I'm not saying the <<none>> isn't the right answer for things under /dev/shm/ but it's not exactly the same problem.... -Eric -- selinux mailing list selinux@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/selinux
