Bug 969899

Summary: SELinux is preventing /usr/lib64/xulrunner/plugin-container from using the transition access on a process
Product: [Fedora] Fedora Reporter: Mukundan Ragavan <nonamedotc>
Component: selinux-policyAssignee: Miroslav Grepl <mgrepl>
Status: CLOSED CURRENTRELEASE QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa>
Severity: unspecified Docs Contact:
Priority: unspecified    
Version: 19CC: dominick.grift, dwalsh, mgrepl, nonamedotc
Target Milestone: ---   
Target Release: ---   
Hardware: x86_64   
OS: Linux   
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version: Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of: Environment:
Last Closed: 2013-06-06 01:14:00 UTC Type: Bug
Regression: --- Mount Type: ---
Documentation: --- CRM:
Verified Versions: Category: ---
oVirt Team: --- RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: --- Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:
Attachments:
Description Flags
SELinux alert complete details none

Description Mukundan Ragavan 2013-06-03 00:29:13 UTC
Created attachment 756146 [details]
SELinux alert complete details

Description of problem:

SELinux policy blocks firefox plugins.

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):

selinux-policy-3.12.1-47.fc19.noarch
firefox-21.0-3.fc19.x86_64

How reproducible:

Always today.

Steps to Reproduce:
1. Open a website that plays flash video, for example, youtube.

Actual results:
SELinux warning appears but video plays

Expected results:
No SELinux warning.

Additional info:

Complete SELinux alert text attached.

Comment 1 Miroslav Grepl 2013-06-04 13:34:03 UTC
Did it happen again?

Comment 2 Mukundan Ragavan 2013-06-04 13:37:00 UTC
Yes! As of this morning, every time I start a new page with flash videos on it, I got this warning.

Comment 3 Mukundan Ragavan 2013-06-06 01:14:00 UTC
OK. I am going to close this bug report. 

While this alert happened in my system *every time*, I reinstalled using F19-TC1 this morning. I do not see this sealert notification anymore. I have tried a lot of different flash website and all of them work - completely different from what I saw before.

Could anyone please tell me what's wrong? Is this any error on my part? It is still the same selinux-policy version.