On Sat, 2008-02-09 at 18:25 +0100, Valent Turkovic wrote: > 2008/2/9 Rahul Sundaram <sundaram@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>: > > Valent Turkovic wrote: > > > 2008/2/9 Valent Turkovic <valent.turkovic@xxxxxxxxx>: > > >> it crashed again: > > >> > > >> # cat /var/log/setroubleshoot/setroubleshootd.log > > >> 2008-02-09 10:36:03,633 [email.WARNING] datoteku nije moguće otvoriti > > >> /var/lib/setroubleshoot/email_alert_recipients, No such file or > > >> directory > > >> 2008-02-09 12:27:44,533 [program.ERROR] Can not handle AVC'S related > > >> to dispatcher. exiting > > >> setroubleshoot context=system_u:system_r:setroubleshootd_t:s0, AVC > > >> scontext=system_u:system_r:setroubleshootd_t:s0 > > > > > > So when selinux service crashes I have no selinux protection? Isn't > > > this a bit of a flaw in design? > > > > SELinux is not a service. SELinux troubleshooter is and absence of it > > does not alter policy. > > > > Rahul > > Ok, so my system is still protected but I can't see the issues what > happen becuase sel troubleshooter service crashes? > To be honesti I prefer it this way :) Just consider it the Fedora version of "Anti-Peril" sunglasses. If stuff is about to blow up, you'll never see it. <chuckles> Ric -- ================================================ My father, Victor Moore (Vic) used to say: "There are two Great Sins in the world... ..the Sin of Ignorance, and the Sin of Stupidity. Only the former may be overcome." R.I.P. Dad. Linux user# 44256 Sign up at: http://counter.li.org/ http://www.sourceforge.net/projects/oar http://www.wayward4now.net <---down4now too ================================================
