http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/SELinux/FAQ/ProposedAdditions#head-6dcc9a7f5f2d7e7ee033e777caacebb434713dd7

"The most common reason for a silent denial is when the policy contains an explicit dontaudit rule to suppress audit messages. The dontaudit rule is often used this way when a benign denial is filling the audit logs."
..which imho should be considered a bug in 90% of the cases where it's used - either a bug in policy, or a bug in the app.

I've seen dontaudits where the app "seems" to work (non-fatal error), but a denial is generated, so the dontaudit was added to make it go away. This seems completely wrong to me - I disagree with the "benign" denial, that's just covering up functionality that doesn't work. There should be a comment above every dontaudit that explains why it's needed, and why this problem can't be solved otherwise. In fact... it would be nice if every sblock of rules had a comment in front of it explaining why it's needed in terms of application functionality.

Just my 2c.

Reply via email to