[Apparmor-dev] Re: Disable profiles with dpkg-old, dpkg-new extension and linked from disable dir.

Christian Boltz apparmor at cboltz.de
Sat Aug 18 05:45:41 MDT 2007


Hello,

Am Dienstag, 14. August 2007 schrieb Steve Beattie:
> On Mon, Aug 13, 2007 at 03:50:36PM -0600, Dominic Reynolds wrote:
> > +++ Mathias Gug [13/08/07 16:12 -0400]:
> > > I've attached a patch that adds profiles that should not be
> > > loaded: * files with dpkg-new, dpkg-old suffix.
> > >  * files which have a link in /etc/apparmor.d/disable/.
[...]
> I'm less enthused about the latter change; I understand the desire
> for it. I don't like this particular approach because it means an
> admin needs to check in two locations to see if there's a profile and
> it's not disabled. Another aspect is that, other than knowing to skip
> the disabled profiles, the tools have no knowledge of them and to
> potentially use them as a starting point if an admin decides they do
> want to profile that particular application.

Silly question: Why don't you do it the other way round?
Read: having a directory with symlinks for enabled profiles.
The profiles could then be in a subdirectory of /etc/apparmor.d/.

Hmm, another idea: what about flags=disabled?

BTW: I don't see a real problem with RPM, it recognizes modified 
profiles as changed and doesn't touch them. Instead, it puts the 
profile from the package in a .rpmnew file which doesn't hurt.


[...]
> As I understand what I've seen of your proposal, the idea is also
> that distributor provided profiles would get installed outside of the
> "enabled" location so that admins can more easily separate out their
> changes from distribution updates (and distribution updates won't
> affect edited profiles or re-enable removed profiles;  [...]

I'm not sure if shipping with disabled profiles is a good idea - you 
loose lots of security by default. (And: lazy admins won't enable the 
profiles - and exactly these people would benefit most from them if 
they are also lazy in installing security updates ;-)


Regards,

Christian Boltz
-- 
> Brauchst Du die sig noch? Ich hab sie nämlich gerade geklaut ;-)
JA!! *uff* ich hab sie noch!!! :)
[> Christian Boltz und David Haller in suse-linux-faq]



More information about the Apparmor-dev mailing list