On Fri, 2004-04-30 at 05:40, Pete Chown wrote:
I think this is especially true for a new security technology. Most
people's view of security is quite simplistic: they want the bad guys
kept out, without their work being interfered with. If SELinux
interferes with their work, they will turn it off, reasoning that normal
Unix security has kept the bad guys out so far. They are then unlikely
to try it again later however much people tell them that the policy has
been improved.
So how would people feel about a separate relaxed policy that allows
everything in the system to run completely unconfined except for a small
set of specific services, e.g. apache, bind, postfix, ...
That would ensure that SELinux wouldn't get in the way of users, while
providing some protection benefit for network-facing services.