Give container_t access to XFRM sockets #33
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
LGTM |
|
@rhatdan Is it possible to backport this change to the RHEL SELinux policy? |
|
Yes you will get it in 6 weeks. I am working on patches now. |
|
Great, thanks @rhatdan! |
|
@rhatdan Is the any way of finding out which releases have this patch and which don't? |
|
Looks like container-selinux-2.14 or newer. |
|
Thanks @rhatdan |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Unprivileged containers cannot currently access XFRM sockets. This is causing issues for Rancher users running on RHEL or CentOS with SELinux enabled due to Rancher's IPsec network implementation.
Unfortunately I'm not familiar enough with SELinux to determine whether unprivileged containers should have these permissions in general. I see the same permissions on similar socket types so it doesn't seem too unreasonable, but I'm still interested to hear feedback on this.
cc @ibuildthecloud