FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > CentOS > CentOS

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 09-20-2011, 05:52 PM
James Edwards
 
Default selinux policy remnant according to /bin/ls on CentOS 6.0 box

On 9/20/2011 1:48 PM, Jon Detert wrote:
> I installed CentOS 6.0 on 2 different x86_64 boxen. Both originally had selinux installed and enabled. I never touched selinux other than to remove as much of it as I could via rpm -e. As far as I can tell, here are the remaining packages that have something to do with it:
>
> # rpm -qa | grep -iE 'sel|pol'
> checkpolicy-2.0.22-1.el6.x86_64
> libselinux-2.0.94-2.el6.x86_64
> libsepol-2.0.41-3.el6.x86_64
> polkit-0.96-2.el6_0.1.x86_64
> #
>
> Both boxen have those packages.
>
> However:
>
> 1) box1 still has files in /selinux whereas box2's /selinux is empty;
> 2) ls -l on box1 shows a '.' at the end of file/directory, which means a SELinux security context applies, according to https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_11_FAQ#Why_does_ls_show_a_dot_.28..29_or_a_ plus_.28.2B.29_at_the_end_on_the_file_modes_for_so me_files.3F
>
> Any idea why box1 still seems to have an selinux policy applied, and how to un-apply it?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Jon
>
Did you disable SELinux by changing 'SELINUX=disabled' in
/etc/sysconfig/selinux? Wouldn't that be easier than removing all the
RPMs? If I may ask, is there a reason to removing the packages?

Thanks,
James
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
 
Old 09-20-2011, 06:23 PM
James Edwards
 
Default selinux policy remnant according to /bin/ls on CentOS 6.0 box

On 9/20/2011 2:14 PM, Jon Detert wrote:
>> Did you disable SELinux by changing 'SELINUX=disabled' in
>> /etc/sysconfig/selinux? Wouldn't that be easier than removing all
> I did not do so explicitly. But it is set to disabled as described above.
> I assume the rpm -e did that. So, there must be some other step missing.
>
> As to that being easier: perhaps, had I known that file/setting existed.
It has been my experience that after after disabling SELinux, all that
is then required is a reboot. Alternatively, running 'setenforce 0',
will disable it immediately.
>> the
>> RPMs? If I may ask, is there a reason to removing the packages?
> I do not plan to use them.
>
> Less is more, right?
I went back and reread your original question, and I realized you had
already answered that. Anyway, you are correct, less is more.

Regards,
James
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
 
Old 09-21-2011, 11:47 AM
Tris Hoar
 
Default selinux policy remnant according to /bin/ls on CentOS 6.0 box

Jon,

Its worth noting in C6 that you really should avoid using RPM to
add/remove stuff and stick with yum. Yum now supports rolling back and
forward package changes, but this is broken if you do things with RPM.

Tris


On 20/09/2011 18:48, Jon Detert wrote:
> I installed CentOS 6.0 on 2 different x86_64 boxen. Both originally had selinux installed and enabled. I never touched selinux other than to remove as much of it as I could via rpm -e. As far as I can tell, here are the remaining packages that have something to do with it:
>
> # rpm -qa | grep -iE 'sel|pol'
> checkpolicy-2.0.22-1.el6.x86_64
> libselinux-2.0.94-2.el6.x86_64
> libsepol-2.0.41-3.el6.x86_64
> polkit-0.96-2.el6_0.1.x86_64
> #
>
> Both boxen have those packages.
>
> However:
>
> 1) box1 still has files in /selinux whereas box2's /selinux is empty;
> 2) ls -l on box1 shows a '.' at the end of file/directory, which means a SELinux security context applies, according to https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_11_FAQ#Why_does_ls_show_a_dot_.28..29_or_a_ plus_.28.2B.29_at_the_end_on_the_file_modes_for_so me_files.3F
>
> Any idea why box1 still seems to have an selinux policy applied, and how to un-apply it?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Jon
> _______________________________________________
> CentOS mailing list
> CentOS@centos.org
> http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
>
> ************************************************** ***********
> This message has been checked for viruses by the
> Birmingham Grid for Learning. For guidance on good
> e-mail practice, e-mail viruses and hoaxes please visit:
> http://www.bgfl.org/emailaup
> ************************************************** ***********
>
>
>

************************************************** ***********
This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential
and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity
to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email
in error please notify postmaster@bgfl.org

The views expressed within this email are those of the
individual, and not necessarily those of the organisation
************************************************** ***********

_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 07:39 AM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright 2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org