Bug 801493

Summary: Please create policy for pacemaker (runs as initrc_t)
Product: Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6 Reporter: Jaroslav Kortus <jkortus>
Component: selinux-policyAssignee: Miroslav Grepl <mgrepl>
Status: CLOSED ERRATA QA Contact: Milos Malik <mmalik>
Severity: high Docs Contact:
Priority: high    
Version: 6.3CC: abeekhof, bubble, dwalsh, mmalik
Target Milestone: rc   
Target Release: ---   
Hardware: All   
OS: Linux   
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version: selinux-policy-3.7.19-160.el6 Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of:
: 848613 915151 (view as bug list) Environment:
Last Closed: 2013-02-21 08:34:48 UTC Type: ---
Regression: --- Mount Type: ---
Documentation: --- CRM:
Verified Versions: Category: ---
oVirt Team: --- RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: --- Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:
Bug Depends On:    
Bug Blocks: 768522, 832330, 848613, 915151, 1003613    
Attachments:
Description Flags
Working policy module none

Description Jaroslav Kortus 2012-03-08 16:27:47 UTC 
Description of problem:
pacemaker (possible rgmanager replacement) does not have any policy defined and starts in initrc_t.

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
selinux-policy-3.7.19-139.el6.noarch


How reproducible:
always

Steps to Reproduce:
1. service pacemaker start
2.
3.
  
Actual results:
wrong context

Expected results:
pacemaker's own context for all daemons with proper permissions (TBD)

Additional info:
Comment 2 Miroslav Grepl 2012-03-09 10:24:59 UTC 
Jaroslav,
so is it going to work as rgmanager? Probably you could try to treat it with rgmanager using

$ chcon -t rgmanager_exec_t /usr/sbin/pacemakerd

We added pacemaker policy to Fedora but if this policy ends up unconfined as rgmanager we will treat it with rgmanager.
Comment 7 RHEL Program Management 2012-07-10 08:20:21 UTC 
This request was not resolved in time for the current release.
Red Hat invites you to ask your support representative to
propose this request, if still desired, for consideration in
the next release of Red Hat Enterprise Linux.
Comment 8 RHEL Program Management 2012-07-11 01:55:22 UTC 
This request was erroneously removed from consideration in Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6.4, which is currently under development.  This request will be evaluated for inclusion in Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6.4.
Comment 15 Andrew Beekhof 2012-12-21 01:29:24 UTC 
Stupid question, have we tried it with some cluster services (like an IP address) configured?
Comment 17 Vladislav Bogdanov 2013-01-04 11:23:57 UTC 
Created attachment 672367 [details]
Working policy module

This one can be considered as a starting point, because I use it with corosync2 but not with cman.
Please look at thread
http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.linux.highavailability.pacemaker/15817
for more details.
Comment 18 errata-xmlrpc 2013-02-21 08:34:48 UTC 
Since the problem described in this bug report should be
resolved in a recent advisory, it has been closed with a
resolution of ERRATA.

For information on the advisory, and where to find the updated
files, follow the link below.

If the solution does not work for you, open a new bug report.

http://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHBA-2013-0314.html
Comment 19 Andrew Beekhof 2013-02-22 07:43:58 UTC 
How come this got closed?
Can we get some feedback on the patch in comment #17 please?

A cluster that can't control resources isn't very useful.
Do we need to clone this into 6.4 or something?
Comment 20 Miroslav Grepl 2013-02-22 09:24:21 UTC 
This bug was about a new policy which we added. Please open a new one. Thank you.