From cb0edd735c40f3bda8a1956489a5794c322aee59 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Nirbheek Chauhan Date: Wed, 29 May 2013 15:38:04 -0400 Subject: [PATCH] core: use the same test as upstart for apparmor Lennart: > Hmm, I just noticed this patch: > > https://code.launchpad.net/~mdeslaur/upstart/apparmor-support/+merge/164169 > > It contains a different check for AppArmor. Basically something like this: > > /sys/module/apparmor/parameters/enabled == 'Y' > > I'd prefer if we could change our code to do the same, given that > the Ubuntu guys are guys are upstream for apparmor. https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=63312 --- src/core/condition.c | 13 ++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/core/condition.c b/src/core/condition.c index 4293d6d1f..b2617ef5b 100644 --- a/src/core/condition.c +++ b/src/core/condition.c @@ -157,13 +157,24 @@ static bool test_virtualization(const char *parameter) { return v > 0 && streq(parameter, id); } +static bool test_apparmor_enabled(void) { + int r; + _cleanup_free_ char *p = NULL; + + r = read_one_line_file("/sys/module/apparmor/parameters/enabled", &p); + if (r < 0) + return false; + + return parse_boolean(p) > 0; +} + static bool test_security(const char *parameter) { #ifdef HAVE_SELINUX if (streq(parameter, "selinux")) return is_selinux_enabled() > 0; #endif if (streq(parameter, "apparmor")) - return access("/sys/kernel/security/apparmor/", F_OK) == 0; + return test_apparmor_enabled(); if (streq(parameter, "ima")) return access("/sys/kernel/security/ima/", F_OK) == 0; if (streq(parameter, "smack")) -- 2.30.2