Description of problem: SELinux is preventing rm from 'unlink' accesses on the file lock. ***** Plugin catchall (100. confidence) suggests ************************** Se ci credi rm dovrebbe essere consentito unlink accesso al lock file per impostazione predefinita. Then si dovrebbe riportare il problema come bug. E' possibile generare un modulo di politica locale per consentire questo accesso. Do consentire questo accesso per ora eseguendo: # ausearch -c 'rm' --raw | audit2allow -M my-$MODULE_NOME # semodule -X 300 -i miei-rm.pp Additional Information: Source Context system_u:system_r:system_mail_t:s0 Target Context system_u:object_r:ddclient_var_t:s0 Target Objects lock [ file ] Source rm Source Path rm Port <Sconosciuto> Host (removed) Source RPM Packages Target RPM Packages SELinux Policy RPM selinux-policy-targeted-38.29-1.fc39.noarch Local Policy RPM selinux-policy-targeted-38.29-1.fc39.noarch Selinux Enabled True Policy Type targeted Enforcing Mode Permissive Host Name (removed) Platform Linux (removed) 6.5.9-300.fc39.x86_64 #1 SMP PREEMPT_DYNAMIC Wed Oct 25 21:39:20 UTC 2023 x86_64 Alert Count 14 First Seen 2023-11-04 20:24:36 CET Last Seen 2023-11-05 09:59:27 CET Local ID cd725dbe-e937-44b2-bde0-c60af0c1fc9d Raw Audit Messages type=AVC msg=audit(1699174767.672:1414): avc: denied { unlink } for pid=129981 comm="rm" name="lock" dev="sde4" ino=18739731 scontext=system_u:system_r:system_mail_t:s0 tcontext=system_u:object_r:ddclient_var_t:s0 tclass=file permissive=1 Hash: rm,system_mail_t,ddclient_var_t,file,unlink Version-Release number of selected component: selinux-policy-targeted-38.29-1.fc39.noarch Additional info: reporter: libreport-2.17.11 reason: SELinux is preventing rm from 'unlink' accesses on the file lock. package: selinux-policy-targeted-38.29-1.fc39.noarch component: selinux-policy hashmarkername: setroubleshoot type: libreport kernel: 6.5.9-300.fc39.x86_64 component: selinux-policy
Created attachment 1997221 [details] File: description
Created attachment 1997222 [details] File: os_info
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 2247977 ***