On Fri, 2006-09-15 at 15:16 -0400, Steve Grubb wrote:
> On Thursday 14 September 2006 18:56, Klaus Weidner wrote:
> > The cleaner solution would be to have an audit record.
> 
> OK, we'll make some patches to fix this.

Are you sure?  What do you want to audit?
newrole -r typoinrolename ?
newrole -r sysadm_r for user not authorized for that role?
any error exit path out of newrole?

The first two cases look exactly identical to newrole btw - it just gets
an error from security_check_context() telling it that the context
wasn't valid, not why.

>   What other SE Linux programs are 
> considered "trusted" and require audit messages when they fail to be used 
> properly? The only other program that I can think of that is audit enhanced 
> is semanage.

semodule came up recently (in order to distinguish different module
operations at finer granularity than the kernel can see).

-- 
Stephen Smalley
National Security Agency

--
redhat-lspp mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-lspp

Reply via email to