Re: working-selinuxns rebase

From: Paul Moore <paul@paul-moore.com>
To: Stephen Smalley <stephen.smalley.work@gmail.com>
Cc: SElinux list <selinux@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: working-selinuxns rebase
Date: Wed, 19 Aug 2020 21:28:03 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAHC9VhTbOfFxtjWYytX4qC9hqeNuUV5dnfcES2qUtYzpuUnBuA@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAEjxPJ6s0AgwoMqP=YCweRGpkC5wsvtusmNO235_S=97NmvSeA@mail.gmail.com>

On Tue, Aug 18, 2020 at 9:37 AM Stephen Smalley
<stephen.smalley.work@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I did a re-base of the working-selinuxns branch on top of latest next;
> this required manual conflict fixes due to the encapsulation of the
> policy state and refactoring of policy reload.  The rebase can be
> found at:
> https://github.com/stephensmalley/selinux-kernel/tree/working-selinuxns-rebase
>
> It boots, passes the selinux-testsuite, and passes the following
> trivial exercising of the unshare mechanism:
> $ sudo bash
> # echo 1 > /sys/fs/selinux/unshare
> # unshare -m -n
> # umount /sys/fs/selinux
> # mount -t selinuxfs none /sys/fs/selinux
> # id
> uid=0(root) gid=0(root) groups=0(root) context=kernel
> # getenforce
> Permissive
> # load_policy
> # id
> uid=0(root) gid=0(root) groups=0(root) context=system_u:system_r:kernel_t:s0
>
> All the same caveats apply - this is still not safe to use and has
> many unresolved issues as noted in the patch descriptions.

Thanks Stephen, do you mind if I pull that into the working-selinuxns
branch in the main SELinux repo?

-- 
paul moore
www.paul-moore.com