RE: IMA policy based on AppArmor profiles

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

Subject: RE: IMA policy based on AppArmor profiles
From: "Magalhaes, Guilherme (Brazil R&D-CL)" <guilherme.magalhaes@xxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 2020 00:23:39 +0000
In-reply-to: <DF4PR8401MB0393C6155D20A343CC171048FF500@DF4PR8401MB0393.NAMPRD84.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM>
Thread-index: AdZ/J1UavSV4+3nUSOSsL9j3KG3BCgABX6Wg
Thread-topic: IMA policy based on AppArmor profiles

Hi,
As an alternative to SELinux roles/types, is it possible to use AppArmor 
profiles to define measure/appraise policy rules?

Thank you.

--
Guilherme

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

Prev by Date: [PATCH] IMA: Add test for dm-crypt measurement
Next by Date: ping//Re: [PATCH] security: fix some spelling mistakes in the comments by codespell
Previous by thread: [PATCH] IMA: Add test for dm-crypt measurement
Next by thread: [PATCH v5 0/3] Carry forward IMA measurement log on kexec on ARM64
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread

[Index of Archives] [Linux Kernel] [Linux Kernel Hardening] [Linux NFS] [Linux NILFS] [Linux USB Devel] [Video for Linux] [Linux Audio Users] [Yosemite News] [Linux SCSI]

Powered by Linux