On 10/21/2013 10:22 AM, Richard Haines wrote:
4) Not sure if this is a bug or 'as designed', I tried using
"in" in a
booleanif statement but failed. The "in-boolean.cil" module
demos
this error.
This should not be allowed. The only thing that should be allowed in a
booleanif statement are typetransitions, typerules, and avrules.
Regarding the allowed items - the 'call' statement is also allowed as I'm using it
already on both versions of the compiler so it seemed strange to exclude the 'in'
statement.
Yes, you're correct, I forgot about the call statement. That is allowed
in booleanif's, but that is because what basically happens with calls is
that the contents of the macro are copied into the booleanif. This means
that any macros called inside of a booleanif must only contain those
statements I listed above.
However, the 'in' statment works kindof like a preprocessor macro in C,
only it knows about CIL namespaces. And so the 'in' statement never
makes it into the binary policy. This means that if we allowed 'in'
statements in booleanifs and you disabled a boolean at runtime, we
couldn't undo whatever changes the 'in' statement made, which is not
likely what the user intended. For this reason, we do not allow the 'in'
statement in booleanifs.
--
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.
