On 11/2/2013 9:42 AM, Sven Vermeulen wrote: > On Wed, Oct 30, 2013 at 9:36 PM, Daniel J Walsh <dwalsh@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > [...] >>> On 10/30/2013 03:31 PM, Daniel J Walsh wrote: >>>> We are trying to shrink out cloud image as small as possible. One idea >>>> was to shrink SELinux Policy footprint by adding compression to it. > [...] >>> Personally, I'd much rather see work done on shrinking the actual policy >>> size in Fedora rather than just compressing it. Both by reducing the >>> overall size of refpolicy through coalescing similar domains/types and by >>> making better use of the work that has already been done to support putting >>> policy modules into rpms and only installing what actually get used. > [...] >> Well we have done some work on combining like domains, see antivirus and >> spamassassin, but this is a lot of work which no one has time for. >> >> I would love to see the mailserver and mailclients domains combined. >> >> If people want to suggest or more importantly submit patches to combine other >> domains, I am all for it. >> >> Problems with shipping policy within rpm still exists. although we (Red Hat) >> are at least moving toward layered products shipping their own policy. >> openstack-selinux, openshift-selinux, gluster-selinux. This is more for them >> updating quicker then RHEL. > In Gentoo, we try to only install the SELinux policies related to the > package that is installed. So if a system does not have a web server, > no httpd policies are loaded. This works pretty well. My workstation > (which is where I do all my SELinux policy development on) has 100 > policy modules loaded; my servers usually have around 50 to 60 modules > loaded. That makes running things like "semodule -B" rather smooth. > Not really fast, but one doesn't need to switch to another thing to do > while waiting (4 seconds on a VM I'm currently playing with). A lot of work is being done to improve the start-up time of consumer (e.g. phones) devices and "disposable" VMs. We're talking about people getting their knickers in a twist over security adding 20 milliseconds to the boot process. Your 4 second semodule run is not going to fly. > When updates occur only on a module's .te file, it could even be > distributed towards the users easily (no need to do a full policy > refresh), although I usually wait and make a full policy release. > > It probably doesn't take long for Fedora/RedHat to find out which > packages need which SELinux policy modules. A quick way to find them > is to parse the RPM file list and check the file contexts of the > SELinux policy tree for matches. > >> For every apache bug in policy, do we want to wait for an update apache >> package, or do we ship lots more packages. > I'd go for the latter. Put the policies in their own RPMs. > > Wkr, > Sven Vermeulen > > -- > 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. > -- 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.
