Re: Re[2]: RSBAC and XFree86-4.0.3 ?

From: Amon Ott <ao@rsbac.org>
Subject: Re: Re[2]: RSBAC and XFree86-4.0.3 ?
Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2001 08:56:33 +0200

Next Article (by Author): Re: ACL on soft links ? Amon Ott
Previous Article (by Author): Re: RSBAC and XFree86-4.0.3 ? Amon Ott
Top of Thread: Re[2]: RSBAC and XFree86-4.0.3 ? Keith Matthews
Articles sorted by: [Date] [Author] [Subject]

On Don, 19 Apr 2001 Keith Matthews wrote:
> On Thu, 19 Apr 2001 09:50:02 +0200 Amon Ott <Amon Ott <ao@rsbac.org>> wrote:
> 
> > On Don, 19 Apr 2001 Fabrice MARIE wrote:
> > > I'm trying to run Xfree4 while under an RSBAC enabled
> > > kernel (2.4.2 with patch-1.1.2pre2, rsbac-v1.1.2pre2 and
> > >         rsbac-admin-v1.1.2pre1, using RC,AUTH,ACL modules & support
> > >         for X compiled in).
> > > 
> > > However, the access is denied with the following message :
> > > 
> > > ---
> > > Apr 19 14:27:23 fabrice kernel: rsbac_adf_request():
> > >   request GET_STATUS_DATA, caller_pid 1283,
> > >   caller_prog_name X, caller_uid 0, target-type SCD, tid kmem, at
> > >   tr none, value 0, result NOT_GRANTED by ACL
> > > Apr 19 14:27:25 fabrice kernel: rsbac_adf_request():
> > >   request GET_STATUS_DATA, caller_pid 1283,
> > >   caller_prog_name X, caller_uid 0, target-type SCD, tid kmem, at
> > >   tr none, value 0, result NOT_GRANTED by ACL
> > > ---
> 
> The problem Fabrice is having is very similar to the one I have been
> investigating, the two differences being that in my case it is the ordinary
> user whose UID is used (this is X 3.3.5), and that the refusal is by RC ACL-

I thought that in your case it was ioports access, what is less critical?

So what shall we do? Give all users access to kernel memory, if X Support is
enabled?

Amon.
-
To unsubscribe from the rsbac list, send a mail to
majordomo@rsbac.org with
unsubscribe rsbac
as single line in the body.

Go to Compuniverse LWGate Home Page.