On 1/8/2016 9:13 AM, Stephen Smalley wrote: > On 01/08/2016 08:00 AM, Christopher J. PeBenito wrote: >> On 1/7/2016 4:19 PM, Stephen Smalley wrote: >>> On 01/07/2016 03:36 PM, Nicolas Iooss wrote: >>>> Hello, >>>> >>>> Since Linux 3.19 targets of /proc/PID/ns/* symlinks have lived in a fs >>>> separated from /proc, named nsfs [1]. These targets are used to enter >>>> the namespace of another process by using setns() syscall [2]. On old >>>> kernels, they were labeled with procfs default type (for example >>>> "getfilecon /proc/self/ns/uts" returned system_u:object_r:proc_t:s0). >>>> When using a recent kernel with a policy without nsfs support, the >>>> inodes are not labeled, as reported for example in Fedora bug #1234757 >>>> [3]. As I encounter this issue on my systems, I asked yesterday on the >>>> refpolicy ML how nsfs inodes should be labeled [4]. >>>> >>>> After digging a little bit about the possibilities, here is a >>>> summary of >>>> the options I have considered so far. >>>> >>>> Option 1: define a new type to label nsfs inodes, nsfs_t. This >>>> works as >>>> expected (c.f. [5] for more details). [...] >>> Only option 1 makes sense to me. >> >> I don't understand the usage of nsfs which makes this confusing, but why >> doesn't option 3 make sense? Since it's under a particular /proc/pid >> entry, doesn't it make sense to label the object as the domain's type? > > The symlink is under a particular /proc/pid directory, but the target is > per-namespace, not per-process. In that case, I agree with the genfscon approach. I originally thought it was per-process. -- Chris PeBenito Tresys Technology, LLC www.tresys.com | oss.tresys.com _______________________________________________ Selinux mailing list Selinux@xxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe, send email to Selinux-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxx. To get help, send an email containing "help" to Selinux-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx.
