|Main Archive Page > Month Archives > selinux archives|
Stephen Smalley wrote:
> On Mon, 2007-04-23 at 13:42 -0400, James Morris wrote:
>> On Mon, 23 Apr 2007, Stephen Smalley wrote: >> >> >>> /lib/libsepol.so.1 should be labeled with shlib_t, not lib_t. Under >>> targeted policy, they are aliases for one another. Under strict, they >>> are separate types. >>> >>> Boot with "enforcing=0 single" to come up permissive into single-user >>> mode, then run /sbin/fixfiles relabel -F to forcible relabel everything, >>> then reboot. >>> >> I wonder if we could automate this, so that the autorelabel is also run >> on boot if you switch between different types of policy. >> >
> rc.sysinit does have autorelabel support, but that won't help in this
> case, because here everything (including /sbin/init) will fail to run
> due to the inability to execute shared libs. It would have to happen
> from early userspace or /sbin/init before loading policy and switching
> to enforcing mode.
So the real question, is there much value with the division between lib_t and shlib_t.
When dealing with strict policy, shared libraries were always getting mislabeled as lib_t, and causing problems, for little security advantage.
As we remove the differences between strict and targeted, I don't intend to get rid of lib_t == shlib_t. -- This message was distributed to subscribers of the selinux mailing list. If you no longer wish to subscribe, send mail to email@example.com with the words "unsubscribe selinux" without quotes as the message.