|[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]|
> I am also wondering if we really need mac_permisions.xml to be > in in it's own repo. I think it should be in sepolicy since it > is part of the policy of the device, like seapp_contexts. I would like to see all policy be contained within a single git project. It could be divided into subdirectories, such as external/sepolicy/base and external/sepolicy/mmac or something. But having it all in one place would be more convenient for overall system policy analysis. ________________________________________ From: owner-selinux@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [owner-selinux@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] on behalf of William Roberts [bill.c.roberts@xxxxxxxxx] Sent: Tuesday, July 17, 2012 4:43 PM To: selinux@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Cc: rpcraig Subject: Change-Id: I61d34a9fd6975f23023f70f205a510e3357d843c I think we need to discuss this change id further. Commit sha b263780156624c38b23d638be6a2d8bdd17511f8 on master selinuxproject/master. It really provides two functions: 1. x.509 cert to seinfo string mapping for seapp_contexts so the zygote spawns it in the right domain... 2. install time permission checking I think these should be submitted as two different patch sets to AOSP respective of their functionality. I think the x.509 cert checks will get pulled in and I am not sure on the install time permission checking. I am also wondering if we really need mac_permisions.xml to be in in it's own repo. I think it should be in sepolicy since it is part of the policy of the device, like seapp_contexts. What are the communities opinions on these comments? -- Respectfully, William C Roberts -- This message was distributed to subscribers of the selinux mailing list. If you no longer wish to subscribe, send mail to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the words "unsubscribe selinux" without quotes as the message.
[Fedora Users] [Fedora Legacy] [Fedora Desktop] [Yosemite Photos] [Yosemite News] [Yosemite Campsites] [KDE Users] [Gnome Users]