On 7/2/07, John Dennis <jdennis(a)redhat.com> wrote:
On Mon, 2007-07-02 at 22:30 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> > 2) The information contained in an AVC denial is security
sensitive. It
> > would be a huge security hole to automatically transmit any of this
> > information in the form of a bug report or other notification channel.
>
> Encrypt it before transmission and scrub the data before revealing
> anything. Also this concern is already somewhat offset from the effort
> described below.
Automatically sending security information to a remote third party is
not going to be accepted by most users and certainly could not be
enabled by default. If automatic transmission is not enabled by default
then what is gained over an administrator of the system being
automatically notified of a denial by setroubleshoot and letting them
evaluate if this particular AVC denial needs to be elevated to a bug
report?
Also scrubbing the data can be very hard since the information that
could be sensitive is more than user name/ip address. While there
might be some statistical information that could be picked up (hmmm
4000 users have problems with /xen installations... maybe we should
see if there is a problem with the policy and what people think they
are doing.
Another issue I could see is that if someone opted into the program,
and Fedora 'witnesses' a breakin (or some other criminal act) via a
Selinux report... what are the reporting requirements (depending on
the nation that the servers are in and where the client is.)
--
Stephen J Smoogen. -- CSIRT/Linux System Administrator
How far that little candle throws his beams! So shines a good deed
in a naughty world. = Shakespeare. "The Merchant of Venice"