Re: Desktop apps interoperability

[Ivan Gyurdiev <ivg2@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

> > 3) If they're not changed, it doesn't matter,
> > because what I'm proposing
> > is backwards compatible. User_t will still have
> > access to all content
> > types, and can write stuff to /home as user_home_t.
> 
> But ...
> 
> > Apps will have to be
> > specifically confined in order not to be able to
> > write to user_home_t.
> > If some app is a problem, it can be left to run at
> > user_home_t for now.
> 
> ... then what's your whole point? I mean,
> why this whole line about structuring where
> user data goes?

Because then certain applications can be constrained further than
they are constrained right now. They will be revoked privileges
to user_home_t, and you will have a more secure system, since exploits
of that app will not affect data in the user_home_t domain.

Specifically, the download folder is most important to implement, as
the target folder for any potentially hostile content.

-- 
Ivan Gyurdiev <ivg2@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Cornell University


--
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.