On 2017-01-17 21:34, Richard Guy Briggs wrote: > On 2017-01-17 15:17, Paul Moore wrote: > > On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 11:12 AM, Richard Guy Briggs <rgb@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > On 2017-01-17 08:55, Steve Grubb wrote: > > >> On Tuesday, January 17, 2017 12:25:51 AM EST Richard Guy Briggs wrote: > > > > ... > > > > >> > Ones that are not so straightforward: > > >> > - "secmark" depends on a kernel config setting, so should it always be > > >> > present but "(none)" if that kernel feature is compiled out? > > >> > > >> If this is selinux related, I'd treat it the same way that we do subj > > >> everywhere else. > > > > > > Ok. > > > > To be clear, a packet's secmark should be recorded via a dedicated > > field, e.g. "secmark", and not use the "subj" field (it isn't a > > subject label in the traditional sense). > > I think Steve was talking about if, when or where to include that field, > not what its label is. In this case it is an "obj=" field, but since it is part of the LSM, each one has its own fields. > > paul moore > > - RGB - RGB -- Richard Guy Briggs <rgb@xxxxxxxxxx> Kernel Security Engineering, Base Operating Systems, Red Hat Remote, Ottawa, Canada Voice: +1.647.777.2635, Internal: (81) 32635 -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netfilter-devel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
