selinux breaks revisor
Simo Sorce
ssorce at redhat.com
Tue Jan 22 18:24:20 UTC 2008
On Tue, 2008-01-22 at 13:14 -0500, Jesse Keating wrote:
> On Tue, 22 Jan 2008 13:04:26 -0500
> Simo Sorce <ssorce at redhat.com> wrote:
>
> > It seem to me that SELinux can provide for the same (or better)
> > "features" of chroot without actually requiring a chrooted
> > environment. So shouldn't we simply provide targeted policies and not
> > use chroot for known services ?
>
> That's not the point of many chroot usages. Frequently chroots are
> used to gain access to content from a different release or arch than
> what you have installed. EG we use RHEL5 to create chroots of f9 and
> build packages within that chroot using F9 content. Likewise we do a
> pure i386 package set on x86_64 to accomplish our i386 build. These
> types of usages cannot be easily replaced with an selinux policy.
I am sorry,
I was thinking only about the security usage of chroots.
I have been using chroots for "mock like" usage myself to release samba
packages for older Debian releases for many years, should have just been
thinking harder :-)
What Yakoov wrote in the other emails makes a lot of sense indeed.
Simo.
--
| Simo S Sorce |
| Sr.Soft.Eng. |
| Red Hat, Inc |
| New York, NY |
More information about the devel
mailing list