-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 452
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
feat: machined, talosctl: enable listing labels #8556
base: main
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
This comment was marked as resolved.
This comment was marked as resolved.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
is there anything meaningful in xattrs except for SELinux labels for us?
In other words, should we limit it to SELinux labels only?
IMA/EVM and AppArmor use them as well. IMA/EVM has been requested afaik, and we should consider it someday |
So my 2 cents:
|
Well, if we only consider SELinux, yes. We could also just avoid listing those and directly get
According to source there should be 1 syscall to list and 1 syscall per xattr to read. Anyway these API calls are not expected to be ran frequently. |
it also allocates a buffer for each xattr read. what I mean is that make xattr reading optional, enable only if we list with |
Alright, will do |
Will reword after review when merging |
This will be useful for debugging SELinux implementation. Make API report other xattrs for further development like IMA/EVM Signed-off-by: Dmitry Sharshakov <dmitry.sharshakov@siderolabs.com>
Pull Request
What? (description)
Extended attributes are useful for SELinux labels and more
Tested in Docker on a SELinux-enforcing host (openSUSE)
Why? (reasoning)
Fixes #1542
Acceptance
Please use the following checklist:
make conformance
)make fmt
)make lint
)make docs
)make unit-tests
)