Remove general unlabeled packet usage.
Back when the SECMARK implementation was new, the packet class was always checked. Because of that, unlabeled_t packet rules proliferated refpolicy since the common case was to have no SECMARK rules. Since then, the kernel has been modified to only enforce the packet class if there are SECMARK rules. Remove the unlabeled_t packet rules, since users of SECMARK will likely want no unlabeled_t packet rules, and the common case users will have no impact since the packet class isn't enforced on their systems. To have partial SECMARK confinement, the following rule applies: allow { domain -type_i_want_to_constrain_t } unlabeled_t:packet { send recv }; It seems like over-allowing, but if you have no SECMARK rules, it's the equivalent of: allow * unlabeled_t:packet { send recv }; Signed-off-by: Chris PeBenito <cpebenito@tresys.com>
This commit is contained in:
parent
7f171849e5
commit
2b7b44d80e
|
@ -2630,9 +2630,6 @@ interface(`kernel_sendrecv_unlabeled_association',`
|
|||
')
|
||||
|
||||
allow $1 unlabeled_t:association { sendto recvfrom };
|
||||
|
||||
# temporary hack until labeling on packets is supported
|
||||
allow $1 unlabeled_t:packet { send recv };
|
||||
')
|
||||
|
||||
########################################
|
||||
|
|
|
@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
|
|||
policy_module(kernel, 1.17.0)
|
||||
policy_module(kernel, 1.17.1)
|
||||
|
||||
########################################
|
||||
#
|
||||
|
|
Loading…
Reference in New Issue