Re: [redhat-lspp] Getting rid of multilevel objects

[LC Bruzenak <lenny bruzenak com>]

On Fri, 2006-07-07 at 17:01 -0700, Casey Schaufler wrote:
...
> > > 
> > > - MLS X11 servers
> > 
> > People are working on this, but I'm not aware of
> > current plans to include
> > that in an evaluated configuration.
> 
> It's always the first thing to go.

Yes, and what a shame that is.
The poorest labeled X demo beats the best demo without it.

Decision makers who have real need for MLS systems can understand SECRET
windows doing SECRET stuff; TOP SECRET windows doing TS stuff.

Add it in post-evaluation and the accreditors balk.
...

> > 
> > Not quite, trusted programs ...
> 
> Are decidedly uninteresting.
> 
> > could have an override
> > capability which lets
> > them communicate anyway while still keeping that
> > functionality away from
> > ordinary users. The challenge is doing that cleanly
> > and safely in sshd
> > in combination with labeled networking...
> 
> I claim that you can't do it and maintain
> the integrity of your MLS.

Casey, can you elaborate a bit on this assertion?
I agree it is not without risk but feel it may be acceptable given that
the trusted program should be well-behaved. Or does it open an exploit
potential?

LCB.
 
-- 
LC Bruzenak
lenny bruzenak com