Am 03.10.2014 um 23:23 schrieb Carlos E. R.:
> On 2014-10-03 22:42, pinguin74 wrote:
>> With regard to the lates Bash Shock, I wonder does it make sense to
>> confine Bash with AppArmor after all?
> It is used by everything, needs access everywhere.
> You can confine the parent and its children, when you know in advance
> what the parent is going to do for months to come.
I think with aa-notify you can learn quickly if the profile needs
adjustment, so it should work if Bash inherits the main profile.
I tried this with clamscan, Thunderbird and Firefox, they all invoke
bash. And never had complaints bash couldn´t access something!
Am Freitag, 3. Oktober 2014 schrieb pinguin74:
> With regard to the lates Bash Shock, I wonder does it make sense to
> confine Bash with AppArmor after all?
> I think to create a dedicated profile solely for Bash does not make
> sense, because in general you want to be able to access everything
> with Bash, right?
> If an app wants to access Bash I envoke /bin/bash with the ix
> parameter, this way Bash inherits the app´s profile. Is this the only
> best way to confine Bash? Or does a dedicated profile make sense?
You can use a child profile (Cx) if you want to give bash different
permissions than the main profile.
If you are really paranoid, you can use another child profile for
binaries executed by the Cx'd bash. Note that aa-logprof won't offer
(C)hild when you are already in a child profile, but you can use (N)amed
and enter the wanted child profile, like /bin/foo///bin/bar if your main
profile is /bin/foo and you want a child profile for /bin/bar.