-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On Fri, 08 Jun 2007 05:55:12 +0100,
[H]omer <spam@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> Verily I say unto thee, that Roy Schestowitz spake thusly:
>
>> Have you seen /that/ one?
>>
>> Tresys Nails 'Hardened Security' With Brickwall & Upcoming Razor
>>
>> ,----[ Quote ]
>> | "But SELinux contains tens of thousands of rules, written in
>> | assembly language.
>
> That's a bit of an exaggeration.
>
> Here's the NSA's provided example policy sourcefile:
>
> ----------------------------------------
> policy_module(myapp,1.0.0)
>
> ########################################
> #
> # Declarations
> #
>
> type myapp_t;
> type myapp_exec_t;
> domain_type(myapp_t)
> domain_entry_file(myapp_t, myapp_exec_t)
>
> type myapp_log_t;
> logging_log_file(myapp_log_t)
>
> type myapp_tmp_t;
> files_tmp_file(myapp_tmp_t)
>
> ########################################
> #
> # Myapp local policy
> #
>
> allow myapp_t myapp_log_t:file ra_file_perms;
>
> allow myapp_t myapp_tmp_t:file manage_file_perms;
> files_tmp_filetrans(myapp_t,myapp_tmp_t,file)
> ----------------------------------------
>
>
> And by comparison, here's some 68k Assembly:
>
> ----------------------------------------
> move.l sp,TempSp
> lea MemEnd,sp
> moveq #0,d0
> moveq #0,d7
> move.l d0,a0
> move.l d0,a6
> movem.l d0-d7/a0-a6,-(sp)
> ----------------------------------------
>
>
> Compared to assembly, SELinux TE (Type Enforcement) Conditional Policy
> Language source files look like a high level language. Certainly they
> seem perfectly comprehensible to me.
>
> Here's the full spec:
>
> http://selinux.svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/selinux/branches/policyrep/checkpolicy/policy_parse.y?view=markup
>
> Note the copyrights. Meyer should know better.
>
> I'll agree with Meyer that the language is complicated, inasmuch as
> *any* unfamiliar language is complicated, but it's hardly Assembly.
>
it's M4, the same macro language sendmail uses for sendmail.cf. Not as
easy on the eyes as python perhaps, but far from assembler.
ADditionally, there are some nice clicky pointy tools for policy
creation/editing if you want to use them.
>> Who are they kidding? From the land where wiretapping is as acceptable
>> as opening one's private snail mail...
>
> There is that... which is why I tend to be sceptical about anything
> "security" related coming from the US ... unless I have the sources.
> That's one of the reasons I'm not keen on gooeys for admin tools; most
> think of it as abstraction, I think of it as obfuscation.
>
without the source, I don't care what country it's from. I am not
interested, and will avoid it if I can.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFGaOvYd90bcYOAWPYRAoswAKDrlTiG9QN7EEM974KVoC3DWcduFQCfVGI6
gTPv/8xf6W/H6Ao+uyjcadk=
=YIqi
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
Jim Richardson http://www.eskimo.com/~warlock
This isn't hell. This is where you get sent when you've been bad in hell.
|
|
