Re: How is the upstream SELinux refpolicy tied into Fedora?

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

 



On Fri, Mar 31, 2023 at 10:49 AM David Sommerseth <dazo@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On 31/03/2023 16:36, Neal Gompa wrote:
> > On Fri, Mar 31, 2023 at 9:58 AM David Sommerseth <dazo@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> I had an upstream SELinux pull-request merged in autumn 2020 [1].  But I
> >> still don't see this SELinux boolean flag (renamed [2] to
> >> "dbus_pass_tuntap_fd") present in Fedora 38.  So I wonder how the
> >> SELinux refpolicy is consumed into Fedora's SELinux policies ... when
> >> can I expect to see this in Fedora and RHEL SELinux policies?
> >>
> >> [1]
> >> <https://github.com/SELinuxProject/refpolicy/commit/79c7859a4807236693c734421642d5aacff0a9e2>
> >> [2]
> >> <https://github.com/SELinuxProject/refpolicy/commit/ba3818ebcc3a627bc331c61acf2df13d223452ea>
> >>
> >
> > It's not consumed by Fedora or openSUSE at all. Fedora and openSUSE
> > follow this instead: https://github.com/fedora-selinux/selinux-policy
> >
> > As far as I know, there has been no reconciliation between the two
> > happening anytime in the recent past and it's unlikely to happen
> > anytime soon.
> Maybe not the right place to ask ... but what is the purpose and goal of
> the SELinux refpolicy project if several of the larger Linux
> distributions doesn't pay attention to it?
>
> I kinda would expect that lots of the SELinux policy details in Fedora
> would be pretty much the same challenges in other distributions as well.

They are. I had a conversation about SELinux vs AppArmor several years
ago in Debian where the Debian folks didn't want to do anything with
SELinux because it was so broken for them. I found out they were
packaging the Tresys refpolicy instead of using our policy and advised
them to change it. Unfortunately, that didn't happen, and I think they
promote AppArmor these days because upstream AppArmor profiles can be
used on any distribution pretty much without issues.

I don't know what caused the policy splinter for SELinux, but as far
as I know, it can't be fixed.


-- 
真実はいつも一つ!/ Always, there's only one truth!
_______________________________________________
selinux mailing list -- selinux@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to selinux-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/selinux@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue




[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Users]     [Fedora Desktop]     [Big List of Linux Books]     [Yosemite News]     [Yosemite Campsites]     [KDE Users]     [Gnome Users]

  Powered by Linux