SELinux provides a strong security measure that can make an SELinux-enabled operating system a type of “fortress”: the so-called “confined users” [1] [2] [3], which add security and isolation capabilities that are in several respects comparable to containers but without many of their restrictions in GUI use cases (this topic is focused on desktop use cases, not server, infra, and such). By default, SELinux does not enforce much within user accounts but only around them. But in graphical desktop...
The problem is that companies don’t want to spend the time learning SELinux and supporting their software with SELinux. I’m an embedded Linux engineer and I see this all the time: companies are barely able to reach their product deadlines as-is; heaven forbid you add another requirement like SELinux to the mix.
Recently a supplier of ours announced that we could finally host their shitty java app on Linux instead of paying fucking Oracle for Solaris. So we were eager to hear the requirements. It was RHEL 8.4 or something, a version that was already EOL at the time.
I agree, but I don’t expect software companies to support it without clear documentation.
lack of documentation isn’t the problem
The problem is that companies don’t want to spend the time learning SELinux and supporting their software with SELinux. I’m an embedded Linux engineer and I see this all the time: companies are barely able to reach their product deadlines as-is; heaven forbid you add another requirement like SELinux to the mix.
Recently a supplier of ours announced that we could finally host their shitty java app on Linux instead of paying fucking Oracle for Solaris. So we were eager to hear the requirements. It was RHEL 8.4 or something, a version that was already EOL at the time.
They can’t even update their distros apparently.