Daniel J Walsh wrote:
Johnson, Richard wrote:
> Q: Can any SELinux directive be put into a policy smodule, or
are
there
> restrictions?
>
>
>
> For example: suppose I wanted to:
>
> allow snmpd_t apmd_t:process ptrace;
> allow snmpd_t auditd_t:process ptrace;
> allow snmpd_t automount_t:process ptrace;
> [ ...and so on ]
>
> so that snmpd could access mib .1.3.6.1.2.1.6. (advisability
> notwithstanding) Could these directives be put into a policy module
even
> though the base policy already has an snmpd i/f?
>
Yes although watch out for name conflicts, IE Don't name your module
the same as an existing module or you will replace it.
BTW the interface
domain_read_all_domains_state(snmpd_t)
Is probably what you want.
>
> Q. Can a module define new booleans? If so are they persistent if
the
> module is unloaded and reloaded?
>
Yes and the booleans will be removed if you unload the policy.
> For example; an snmpd policy module with an snmpd_can_ptrace boolean.
> Are there namespace conventions?
Well we would prefer all booleans to be named with the name of the
module. Although there are a lot of booleans that do not follow that
standard. I would love to have aliasing for booleans so we could
rename
them.
>
> Q. What happens if the base policy (or another policy modules) is
> updated with overlapping statements.
They are additive.
>
> Am I correct in believing that the set of allows is the union of the
> base allows + all module allows?
Yes
Thanks. And thanks for the hint about domain_read_all_domains_state().