On Wed, Jun 07, 2017 at 10:44:59AM -0600, Christian Ehrhardt wrote:
On Fri, Jun 2, 2017 at 12:57 PM, Guido Günther
<agx(a)sigxcpu.org> wrote:
> Shouldn't this only be added when ceph is in use?
> Cheers,
> -- Guido
>
Yeah it is part of a category of rules where in a perfect world we would
wirte virt-aa-helper code for each of them.
In this particular case I think the existance of the following would be the
trigger:
<disk type='network'>
[...]
<source protocol="rbd"
Yet for some cases - like this one - the "opening" we are doing in regard
to apparmor is quite small and maybe the burden to create (and maintain) it
in virt-aa-helper is too much.
So I'd appreciate if that change could be considered as-is - otherwise
please let me know - I'll then add it to a bunch of issues of the category
"needs to be done in virt-aa-helper" which I already track.
I was uder the impression that ceph.conf might contain sensitive data
which we might not want to open up to all domains but looking at
http://docs.ceph.com/docs/jewel/rados/configuration/ceph-conf/
this does not seem to be the case so this is probably o.k.
CHeers,
-- Guido