Re: [apparmor] Question about file_mmap/exec in the case of perl/shell scripts

2019-09-17 Thread Mikhail Morfikov
On 17/09/2019 14:53, Seth Arnold wrote: > On Thu, Sep 12, 2019 at 04:20:22PM +0200, Mikhail Morfikov wrote: >> Shouldn't be here some "x" or "m" permissions, or maybe AppArmor assumes >> this automatically for the confined path, so it's redundant to specify it >> manually? > > Interpreters are

Re: [apparmor] Question about file_mmap/exec in the case of perl/shell scripts

2019-09-17 Thread Seth Arnold
On Thu, Sep 12, 2019 at 04:20:22PM +0200, Mikhail Morfikov wrote: > Shouldn't be here some "x" or "m" permissions, or maybe AppArmor assumes > this automatically for the confined path, so it's redundant to specify it > manually? Interpreters are handled differently:

[apparmor] Question about file_mmap/exec in the case of perl/shell scripts

2019-09-12 Thread Mikhail Morfikov
When I add a profile for some app, and this profile wants to execute or map some file, it usually wants the "x" (operation="exec") or "m" (operation="file_mmap") permissions. But what about the path the profile confines? For instance, I have a perl script under /usr/bin/some_app . When I