I have just hit the same problem on RHEL5.5, 
selinux-policy-2.4.6-279.el5

+++ This bug was initially created as a clone of Bug #561037 +++

Description of problem:
selinux error


Summary:

SELinux is preventing /usr/sbin/winbindd from connecting to port 135.

Detailed Description:

SELinux has denied winbindd from connecting to a network port 135 which does not
have an SELinux type associated with it. If winbindd should be allowed to
connect on 135, use the semanage command to assign 135 to a port type that
winbind_t can connect to (smbd_port_t, ldap_port_t, dns_port_t, kerberos_port_t,
ocsp_port_t).
If winbindd is not supposed to connect to 135, this could signal a intrusion
attempt.

Allowing Access:

If you want to allow winbindd to connect to 135, you can execute
semanage port -a -t PORT_TYPE -p tcp 135
where PORT_TYPE is one of the following: smbd_port_t, ldap_port_t, dns_port_t,
kerberos_port_t, ocsp_port_t.

Additional Information:

Source Context                system_u:system_r:winbind_t:s0
Target Context                system_u:object_r:reserved_port_t:s0
Target Objects                None [ tcp_socket ]
Source                        winbindd
Source Path                   /usr/sbin/winbindd
Port                          135
Host                          (removed)
Source RPM Packages           samba-winbind-3.4.5-55.fc12
Target RPM Packages           
Policy RPM                    selinux-policy-3.6.32-73.fc12
Selinux Enabled               True
Policy Type                   targeted
Enforcing Mode                Enforcing
Plugin Name                   connect_ports
Host Name                     (removed)
Platform                      Linux (removed)
                              2.6.31.12-174.2.3.fc12.x86_64 #1 SMP Mon Jan 18
                              19:52:07 UTC 2010 x86_64 x86_64
Alert Count                   3
First Seen                    Thu 28 Jan 2010 03:50:17 PM MST
Last Seen                     Tue 02 Feb 2010 07:38:55 AM MST
Local ID                      8d08b986-0568-41a0-9b97-aa09549b499f
Line Numbers                  

Raw Audit Messages            

node=(removed) type=AVC msg=audit(1265121535.300:27254): avc:  denied  { name_connect } for  pid=1610 comm="winbindd" dest=135 scontext=system_u:system_r:winbind_t:s0 tcontext=system_u:object_r:reserved_port_t:s0 tclass=tcp_socket

node=(removed) type=SYSCALL msg=audit(1265121535.300:27254): arch=c000003e syscall=42 success=no exit=-13 a0=15 a1=7fb8f6a8ddc0 a2=10 a3=68 items=0 ppid=1561 pid=1610 auid=4294967295 uid=0 gid=0 euid=0 suid=0 fsuid=0 egid=0 sgid=0 fsgid=0 tty=(none) ses=4294967295 comm="winbindd" exe="/usr/sbin/winbindd" subj=system_u:system_r:winbind_t:s0 key=(null)

--- Additional comment from dwalsh on 2010-02-09 15:50:23 EST ---

Simo, Any idea what winbind would connect to port 135?

--- Additional comment from dwalsh on 2010-02-16 10:01:28 EST ---

*** Bug 565462 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

--- Additional comment from dwalsh on 2010-02-16 10:03:14 EST ---

What is listening at port 135?

--- Additional comment from dwalsh on 2010-02-16 10:09:03 EST ---

http://www.grc.com/port_135.htm

Looks like it is trying to connect to dcom port?

Miroslav, 

I think we should add

network_port(dcom, udp,135,s0, udp,135,s0)

to corenetwork.te.in

and

corenet_tcp_connect_dcom_port(winbind_t)

to samba.te

--- Additional comment from ssorce on 2010-02-16 10:24:38 EST ---

135 is the RPC Endpoint Mapper (like the nfs portmap)

--- Additional comment from dwalsh on 2010-02-16 10:39:29 EST ---

Is calling it dcom appropriate or should I call it something like
rpc_endpoint?

--- Additional comment from ssorce on 2010-02-16 11:05:14 EST ---

dcom looks not appropriate.
EPM or EPMAP is what is used in the windows world to defined the service in short.
So maybe rpc_epm or rpc_epmap ?

--- Additional comment from dwalsh on 2010-02-16 11:16:37 EST ---

Well it is called epmap in /etc/services so

Miroslav make it


network_port(epmap, udp,135,s0, tcp,135,s0)

corenet_tcp_connect_epmap_port(winbind_t)

--- Additional comment from mgrepl on 2010-02-16 11:20:49 EST ---

I agree. 

Fixed in selinux-policy-3.6.32-91.fc12