From: Paul Moore To: Stephen Smalley Subject: Re: [RFC] SELinux: use SECINITSID_NETMSG instead of SECINITSID_UNLABELED for NetLabel Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2007 16:40:10 -0400 Cc: selinux@tycho.nsa.gov, James Morris , Joshua Brindle , dwalsh@redhat.com References: <20070314025023.115872483@hp.com> <200704231456.30910.paul.moore@hp.com> <1177360618.24282.107.camel@moss-spartans.epoch.ncsc.mil> In-Reply-To: <1177360618.24282.107.camel@moss-spartans.epoch.ncsc.mil> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Message-Id: <200704231640.10821.paul.moore@hp.com> Sender: owner-selinux@tycho.nsa.gov List-Id: selinux@tycho.nsa.gov On Monday 23 April 2007 4:36:58 pm Stephen Smalley wrote: > On Mon, 2007-04-23 at 14:56 -0400, Paul Moore wrote: > > The next logical questions are first, does anyone have a good idea on how > > to solve these compatibility breaks? Second, assuming there is not an > > easy fix, do people consider the issues above to be deal breakers? > > It sounds as though it has a very limited scope (MLS & NetLabel), and > the kernel/policy mismatch is less likely in that environment (as > changing the kernel or the policy would require re-evaluation, and in > particular, the policy change modifies the MLS constraints). So > possibly just a matter of documenting the dependency between the kernel > version and the policy version for MLS. Okay, that sounds good to me. Thanks. -- paul moore linux security @ hp -- This message was distributed to subscribers of the selinux mailing list. If you no longer wish to subscribe, send mail to majordomo@tycho.nsa.gov with the words "unsubscribe selinux" without quotes as the message.