SELinux last straw

[Arthur Pemberton]

On 10/17/07, Les Mikesell <lesmikesell at gmail.com> wrote:
> Jacques B. wrote:
> >
> > 3 - How can you effectively troubleshoot an existing problem when a
> > past one was not dealt in such a manner as to ensure that it was
> > corrected
>
> How can you use a system that does not have an effective troubleshooting
> mechanism regardless of how it got into its current state?  The simple
> traditional unix mechanism is something you can easily understand and
> verify.

What exactly meets your definition of effecting troubleshooting
mechnanisms? ie. what more do you feel needs to be added to SELinux?

> >(the intrusion incident being the most notable one but I'm
> > sure others on the list could identify other past issues that were
> > potentially not dealt with adequately based on what was posted in
> > those threads).  The existing problem could be a domino effect from a
> > past problem and may never be properly dealt with until the underlying
> > issue is dealt with.
>
> Regardless, you should have a way to check and fix it, unless what you
> are running is unimportant and you can abandon it.

Well to check it all one has to do is look at the logs. If it is an
SELinux, it will normally tell you exactly how to fix it.

-- 
Fedora 7 : sipping some of that moonshine
( www.pembo13.com )