Josh,
* Joshua Brindle (method@manicmethod.com) wrote:
> Stephen Frost wrote:
>> I do think that, technically, there's no reason we couldn't allow for
>> multiple "only-more-restrictive" models to be enabled and built in a
>> single binary for systems which support it. As such, I would make those
>> just "#if defined()" rather than "#elif". Let it be decided at runtime
>> which are actually used, otherwise it becomes a much bigger problem for
>> packagers too.
>
> It isn't just a case of using #if and it magically working. You'd need a
> system to manage multiple labels on each object that can be addressed by
> different systems. So instead of having an object mapped only to
> "system_u:object_r:mydb_t:s15" you'd also have to have it mapped to,
> eg., "^" for Smack.
I'm not sure I see that being a problem.. We're going to have
references in our object managers which make sense to us (eg: table
OIDs) and then a way of mapping those to some label (or possibly a set
of labels, as you describe). We might want to reconsider the catalog
structure a bit if we want to support more than one at a time, but I
don't see it as a huge problem to support more than one label existing
for a given object.
Thanks,
Stephen
