How best (BUT WHY) get rid of SELinux?

[Jonathan Underwood]

On 25/09/2007, Les Mikesell <lesmikesell at gmail.com> wrote:
> Jonathan Underwood wrote:
> > On 25/09/2007, Les Mikesell <lesmikesell at gmail.com> wrote:
> >>   2) How many more years and millions will it take to adapt the
> >> decades-worth of tradtional unix tools and applications that Linux users
> >> take for granted to a wildly different security model?
> >>
> >
> > This work has been done. What Unix tools are you using which aren't
> > working with SElinux?
>
> I have an assortment of suid perl scripts that run under apache's cgi
> interface.  I didn't expect them to work.  Will they?

No disrespect, but your personal perl scripts don't really count as
"traditional unix tools". Write a policy for them, and all will be
fine.

> What about
> MimeDefang, running as a sendmail milter and connecting via local
> sockets to an assortment of mail scanning processes that may each be
> running under their own uid.  I've seen issues posted about the sockets
> amd SELinux.  Have they been solved?
>

I believe so. Again tho, things will work with correctly written policy modules.
Basically your complaint seems to be that you don't want to learn to
use the tools to write the policy modules you need. Everything has a
cost, and a benefit... it's a personal decision as to which outweighs
the other.

J.