Hide Forgot
Description of problem: Some booleans are defined in targeted policy but have no effect on a system running that policy. 1. assumption: "seinfo -b /etc/selinux/targeted/policy/policy.21" displays booleans which are defined in the binary policy file 2. assumption: "sesearch -C --all /etc/selinux/targeted/policy/policy.21 | grep user_ping" displays all rules associated with user_ping boolean Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): selinux-policy-devel-2.4.6-306.el5 selinux-policy-strict-2.4.6-306.el5 selinux-policy-targeted-2.4.6-306.el5 selinux-policy-minimum-2.4.6-306.el5 selinux-policy-mls-2.4.6-306.el5 selinux-policy-2.4.6-306.el5 How reproducible: always Steps to Reproduce: # for I in mls strict targeted ; do echo $I ; seinfo -b /etc/selinux/$I/policy/policy.21 2>/dev/null | wc -l ; done mls 122 strict 136 targeted 268 # seinfo -b /etc/selinux/targeted/policy/policy.21 2>/dev/null | grep user_ping user_ping # sesearch -C --all /etc/selinux/targeted/policy/policy.21 | grep user_ping | wc -l 0 # Actual results: * user_ping boolean is defined in targeted policy, but enabling/disabling of the boolean has no effect on a system running targeted policy Expected results: * user_ping boolean is NOT defined in targeted policy, because enabling/disabling of the boolean would have no effect in a system running targeted policy Additional information: * other booleans which have no effect in targeted policy: user_direct_mouse, user_dmesg, user_net_control, user_rw_noexattrfile, user_tcp_server, user_ttyfile_stat
While true I don't think this is something we want to change, because it could effect strict and MLS policy for little benefit. In RHEL6 these booleans have meaning.