-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 8
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
set SELinux booleans during install #11
Comments
mscherer
pushed a commit
to gluster/glusterfs
that referenced
this issue
Jun 22, 2017
Starting in Fedora 26 and RHEL 7.4 there are new targeted policies in selinux which include a tuneable to allow ganesha.nfsd to access the gluster (FUSE) shared_storage volume where ganesha maintains its state. N.B. rpm doesn't have a way to distinguish between RHEL 7.3 or 7.4 so it can't be enabled for RHEL at this time. /usr/sbin/semanage is in policycoreutils-python in RHEL (versus policycoreutils-python-utils in Fedora.) Once RHEL 7.4 GAs we may also wish to specify the version for RHEL 7 explicitly, i.e. Requires: selinux-policy >= 3.13.1-160. But beware, the corresponding version in Fedora 26 seems to be selinux-policy-3.13.1.258 or so. (Maybe earlier versions, but that's what's currently in the F26 beta. release-3.10 is the upstream master branch for glusterfs-ganesha. For release-3.11 and later storhaug needs a similar change, which is tracked by linux-ha-storage/storhaug#11 Maybe at some point we would want to consider migrating the targeted policies for glusterfs (and nfs-ganesha) from selinux-policy to a glusterfs-selinux (and nfs-ganesha-selinux) subpackage? Change-Id: I04a5443edd00636cbded59a2baddfa98095bf7ac BUG: 1463641 Signed-off-by: Kaleb S. KEITHLEY <[email protected]> Reviewed-on: https://review.gluster.org/17597 Smoke: Gluster Build System <[email protected]> Reviewed-by: Niels de Vos <[email protected]> Reviewed-by: jiffin tony Thottan <[email protected]> CentOS-regression: Gluster Build System <[email protected]>
guihecheng
pushed a commit
to guihecheng/glusterfs
that referenced
this issue
Nov 13, 2019
Starting in Fedora 26 and RHEL 7.4 there are new targeted policies in selinux which include a tuneable to allow ganesha.nfsd to access the gluster (FUSE) shared_storage volume where ganesha maintains its state. N.B. rpm doesn't have a way to distinguish between RHEL 7.3 or 7.4 so it can't be enabled for RHEL at this time. /usr/sbin/semanage is in policycoreutils-python in RHEL (versus policycoreutils-python-utils in Fedora.) Once RHEL 7.4 GAs we may also wish to specify the version for RHEL 7 explicitly, i.e. Requires: selinux-policy >= 3.13.1-160. But beware, the corresponding version in Fedora 26 seems to be selinux-policy-3.13.1.258 or so. (Maybe earlier versions, but that's what's currently in the F26 beta. release-3.10 is the upstream master branch for glusterfs-ganesha. For release-3.11 and later storhaug needs a similar change, which is tracked by linux-ha-storage/storhaug#11 Maybe at some point we would want to consider migrating the targeted policies for glusterfs (and nfs-ganesha) from selinux-policy to a glusterfs-selinux (and nfs-ganesha-selinux) subpackage? Change-Id: I04a5443edd00636cbded59a2baddfa98095bf7ac Signed-off-by: Kaleb S. KEITHLEY <[email protected]> Reviewed-on: https://review.gluster.org/17597 Smoke: Gluster Build System <[email protected]> Reviewed-by: Niels de Vos <[email protected]> Reviewed-by: jiffin tony Thottan <[email protected]> CentOS-regression: Gluster Build System <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: Jiffin Tony Thottan <[email protected]>
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1461098
Issue was fixed by adding new SELinux boolean. (using this boolean you can allow some actions, in this case allow ganesha to acces fusefs_t labels.)
If you would like to switch this boolean on during installation ganesha you can follow this tutorial:
https://mojo.redhat.com/docs/DOC-1131234-creating-own-product-policies#jive_content_id_61_Setting_Booleans_During_a_Product_Policy_Installation
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: