Merge lp://staging/~sdeziel/apparmor/wireshark-refresh into lp://staging/apparmor/2.12

It feels like the accessibility dbus rules may be better suited in an #include. What else will require these?

Otherwise looks good to me.

Thanks

On 2016-04-13 05:50 PM, Seth Arnold wrote:
> It feels like the accessibility dbus rules may be better suited in an #include.

Or maybe abstractions/dbus-accessibility-strict is just too strict?

> What else will require these?

I copied it from Firefox. Locally I have the following profiles using
the "a11y" rules:

 usr.bin.firefox
 usr.bin.keepassx
 usr.bin.pidgin
 usr.bin.remmina
 usr.bin.vlc
 usr.bin.wireshark

On 2016-04-14 14:03:27, Simon Déziel wrote:
> On 2016-04-13 05:50 PM, Seth Arnold wrote:
> > It feels like the accessibility dbus rules may be better suited in an #include.
>
> Or maybe abstractions/dbus-accessibility-strict is just too strict?

dbus-accessibility-strict is for talking to dbus-daemon itself on the
accessibility bus.

dbus-accessibility is for doing any action on the accessibility bus.

Note that the rules you have are for talking to a service on the session
bus. I'm thinking that there should be an "accessibility-services" (or
maybe just "accessibility") abstraction which has the a11y rules and
also includes dbus-accessibility-strict?

@Tyler, this makes sense to me. The accessibility rules are not well defined at all and could use a lot of love.

Seth, Jamie, Tyler: thanks for the reviews and the forward looking thinking. It's not clear to me what's a blocker or not. Are you blocking on a big refactoring of the accessibility rules before this MR gets merged? I'm not sure it would be fair to expect Simon to do this work right now :) How about we track the refactoring proposal on a new bug and not block on it here?

intrigeri: I agree, we should probably not block this merge request on an accessibility abstraction cleanup. I have filed https://bugs.launchpad.net/apparmor/+bug/1727887 to capture that request.

Otherwise, LGTM. I'll merge it in.