"Large legacy application."
I'm running for the nearest exit and getting off the property already.
On July 23, 2021 8:49:25 AM AKDT, Todd Sandor toddlersandor@gmail.com wrote:
I'm a selinux newbie using RHEL7.9 and I'm in the process of creating a "private/application" selinux policy for a large legacy application.
For some AVCs/denials I've been using the audit2allow to generate some of the rules/interfaces to resolve the AVCs/denials.
Questions about using the "-R" option to generate the policy rules:
- What are the risks of using the "-R" option?
Do people use the "interfaces" which the "-R" generates in the policies deployed in production environments? When "-R" is used, how does the tool itself determine which "interface" to use? Is it Linux distribution and release specific so if we upgrade will it be a problem?
The redhat documentation and man page (and other vendor's documentation) specify it is a risk to use this tool (see [1][2]).
- When the "-R" option is not used, separate rules are generated that
do not include "interface" rules. Is it safe to use the rules audit2allow generates (without "-R") or are those a risk as well?
- Any other suggestions for resolving AVCs/denials ?
[1] https://access.redhat.com/documentation/en-us/red_hat_enterprise_linux/7/htm...
[2] audit2allow man page man audit2allow ... -R | --reference Generate reference policy using installed macros. This attempts to match denials against interfaces and may be inaccurate.
Thanks