On Wed, Aug 29, 2012 at 10:35:30PM -0700, Eric Blake wrote:
On 08/29/2012 05:37 PM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> From: "Daniel P. Berrange" <berrange(a)redhat.com>
>
> If no 'security_driver' config option was set, then the code
> just loaded the 'dac' security driver. This is a regression
> on previous behaviour, where we would probe for a possible
> security driver. ie default to SELinux if available.
>
> This changes things so that it 'security_driver' is not set,
> we once again do probing. For simplicity we also always
> create the stack driver, even if there is only one driver
> active.
>
> The desired semantics are:
>
> - security_driver not set
> -> probe for selinux/apparmour/nop
> -> auto-add DAC driver
> - security_driver set to a string
> -> add that one driver
> -> auto-add DAC driver
> - security_driver set to a list
> -> add all drivers in list
> -> auto-add DAC driver
>
> It is not allowed, or possible to specify 'dac' in the
> security_driver config param, since that is always
> enabled.
That's true when dynamic_ownership is 1. But what happens if
dynamic_ownership is 0 (defaults to off for all guests), but for one
particular guest, I want to override that default and explicitly enable
dac for that guest?
dynamic_ownership doesn't control whether the DAC driver is used or
not, it merely controls whether the DAC driver does re-labelling or
not. Now that we have multiple <seclabel> elements in the guest XML
you can control that explicitly using teh relabel=yes|no attribute
Daniel
--
|:
http://berrange.com -o-
http://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange/ :|
|:
http://libvirt.org -o-
http://virt-manager.org :|
|:
http://autobuild.org -o-
http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ :|
|:
http://entangle-photo.org -o-
http://live.gnome.org/gtk-vnc :|