On Tuesday 29 July 2008 21:33, Stephen Smalley <sds@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Tue, 2008-07-29 at 18:50 +1000, Russell Coker wrote: > > Currently we have the attributes user_home_dir_type and user_home_type > > applied to the main types for the home directory of regular users in a > > strict policy configuration (this means user_t etc). > > > > While it is possible to have unconfined_t and user_t on the same system, > > I don't expect this to be a common configuration. In fact I expect that > > in practice they will be mutually exclusive. > > Actually, it is a common situation in modern Fedora - they can map users > they wish to confine to user_u (and thus to user_t) while leaving e.g. > root as unconfined_u and thus unconfined_t. So what do they do for the "targeted" case where all users are unconfined_t and they want to have POP/IMAP servers retrieve mail from the users' home directories? -- russell@xxxxxxxxxxxx http://etbe.coker.com.au/ My Blog http://www.coker.com.au/sponsorship.html Sponsoring Free Software development -- This message was distributed to subscribers of the selinux mailing list. If you no longer wish to subscribe, send mail to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the words "unsubscribe selinux" without quotes as the message.
