range_transition revisited
cover range_transition revisited
The kernel portion of the range_transition work has been included in the -mm tree and should go into 2.6.19. I hope that I finally some userspace patches that are acceptable to take advantage of that kernel patch...
The first patch is just an update of the last patch posted to this list:
http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=selinux&m=115471167305358&w=2
This is just an update to the latest svn tree - no logic changes. I separated this out because it seemed that everyone was good with this code.
The second patch addresses the question "Is an mls_range_t semantic enough for use in modules?". Unfortunately, the answer was no.
The third patch used the new semantic MLS representation for storing user's MLS data in modules. This format will allow users in MLS modules in the future.
Note that these patches are intended to go together. There are two new ideas put into the modular policy version, but the number is only bumped once. Once again, I think that the policy formats are ready to go and should support everything we could ever possibly want in the future (well a few things anyway).
As before, this patch only addresses the necessary format changes to get modular support for range_transition statements (and now users). However, it does allow immediate use of the extended range_transition statements where they were valid before.
Signature · 6 lines
Darrel -- This message was distributed to subscribers of the selinux mailing list. If you no longer wish to subscribe, send mail to [email protected] with the words "unsubscribe selinux" without quotes as the message.
Quoted 20 lines · Darrel Goeddel
The kernel portion of the
range_transitionwork has been included in the -mm tree and should go into 2.6.19. I hope that I finally some userspace patches that are acceptable to take advantage of that kernel patch...The first patch is just an update of the last patch posted to this list:
http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=selinux&m=115471167305358&w=2
This is just an update to the latest svn tree - no logic changes. I separated this out because it seemed that everyone was good with this code.The second patch addresses the question "Is an
mls_range_tsemantic enough for use in modules?". Unfortunately, the answer was no.The third patch used the new semantic MLS representation for storing user's MLS data in modules. This format will allow users in MLS modules in the future.
Note that these patches are intended to go together. There are two new ideas put into the modular policy version, but the number is only bumped once. Once again, I think that the policy formats are ready to go and should support everything we could ever possibly want in the future (well a few things anyway).
Quoted 5 lines
As before, this patch only addresses the necessary format changes to get modular support for
range_transitionstatements (and now users). However, it does allow immediate use of the extendedrange_transitionstatements where they were valid before.
Thanks, merged as of checkpolicy 1.30.11 and libsepol 1.12.26 with changes to patch 2 for endieness correctness.
I'd like to see some unit tests for the linker and expander portions of this when you get a chance..
--
This message was distributed to subscribers of the selinux mailing list. If you no longer wish to subscribe, send mail to [email protected] with the words "unsubscribe selinux" without quotes as the message.