Bug 216063 - spamd avc's
Summary: spamd avc's
Alias: None
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: selinux-policy-targeted
Version: 6
Hardware: All
OS: Linux
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Daniel Walsh
QA Contact: Ben Levenson
Depends On:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
Reported: 2006-11-17 02:04 UTC by Dave Jones
Modified: 2015-01-04 22:29 UTC (History)
1 user (show)

Clone Of:
Last Closed: 2007-03-08 13:52:22 UTC

Attachments (Terms of Use)

Description Dave Jones 2006-11-17 02:04:37 UTC
# dmesg | grep spamd
audit(1163345191.669:13): avc:  denied  { name_bind } for  pid=23290
comm="spamd" src=1645 scontext=system_u:system_r:spamd_t:s0
tcontext=system_u:object_r:radius_port_t:s0 tclass=udp_socket
audit(1163347735.566:14): avc:  denied  { name_bind } for  pid=8251 comm="spamd"
src=10080 scontext=system_u:system_r:spamd_t:s0
tcontext=system_u:object_r:amanda_port_t:s0 tclass=udp_socket
audit(1163365031.247:15): avc:  denied  { name_bind } for  pid=25641
comm="spamd" src=1812 scontext=system_u:system_r:spamd_t:s0
tcontext=system_u:object_r:radius_port_t:s0 tclass=udp_socket
audit(1163403528.429:16): avc:  denied  { name_bind } for  pid=31781
comm="spamd" src=64005 scontext=system_u:system_r:spamd_t:s0
tcontext=system_u:object_r:traceroute_port_t:s0 tclass=udp_socket
audit(1163451560.191:26): avc:  denied  { name_bind } for  pid=22905
comm="spamd" src=1646 scontext=system_u:system_r:spamd_t:s0
tcontext=system_u:object_r:radacct_port_t:s0 tclass=udp_socket
audit(1163565784.717:36): avc:  denied  { name_bind } for  pid=7515 comm="spamd"
src=7004 scontext=system_u:system_r:spamd_t:s0
tcontext=system_u:object_r:afs_ka_port_t:s0 tclass=udp_socket

Comment 1 Daniel Walsh 2006-11-17 18:02:22 UTC
Are you running nis?

This looks like the allow_ypbind boolean is not set?

Comment 2 Dave Jones 2006-11-21 01:46:54 UTC
not running nis, or any other centralised login mechanism. just plain local user

Comment 3 Daniel Walsh 2006-11-21 20:51:34 UTC
Is spamd failing on these or just trying another port?  IE Can I dontaudit these
or do I need to allow them?

Comment 4 Dave Jones 2006-11-25 03:36:55 UTC
I'm not noticing any misbehaviour from spamassassin. Ie, spam is getting picked
up and flagged accordingly, so I'd assume that these are benign.

Comment 5 Daniel Walsh 2006-11-25 10:48:00 UTC

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.