Welcome!
Important information
-- Spectre and Meltdown vulnerabilities
-- Change in MX sources

News
-- MX Linux on social media: here
-- Mepis support still here

Current releases
-- MX-17.1 Final release info here
-- antiX-17 release info here

New users
-- Please read this first, and don't forget to add system and hardware information to posts!
-- Here are the Forum Rules

[Solved] Should MX have apparmor installed and configured by default like Ubuntu?

Message
Author
User avatar
Eadwine Rose
Forum Veteran
Forum Veteran
Posts: 6100
Joined: Wed Jul 12, 2006 2:10 am

Re: Should MX have apparmor installed and configured by default like Ubuntu?

#11 Post by Eadwine Rose » Sun Feb 18, 2018 11:39 am

Not installed on mine either, so there is no need to get rid of anything *shrug*
MX-17.1_x64 Horizon 14-3-2018 * 4.15.0-1-amd64 ext4 Xfce 4.12.3 * AMD Asus M4A785TD-V EVO AM3 * ASUS GF GT640-1GD5-L NVIDIA 384.130 * AMD Proc. Athl II X4 635, sAM3 * HDA ATI SB VT1708S An * 2x4Gb DDR3 1600 Kingst * 22" Samsung SyncM P2250 * HP F2280

User avatar
v3g4n
Forum Guide
Forum Guide
Posts: 1791
Joined: Sat Jan 16, 2016 8:20 pm

Re: Should MX have apparmor installed and configured by default like Ubuntu?

#12 Post by v3g4n » Sun Feb 18, 2018 12:26 pm

stsoh wrote:no good news, it''s in mx. it's disabled, i want to rip it off. :frown: :bawling:
start searching new distro.....no luv for mx.

Code: Select all

$ dmesg|grep ram
[    0.000000] Base memory trampoline at [ffff880000099000] 99000 size 24576
[    0.004794] Security Framework initialized
[    0.004802] AppArmor: AppArmor disabled by boot time parameter
.........
The fact that you are considering switching to another distro because AppArmor is installed on your system and disabled is absurd. Even if it was to be enabled I can't believe that you would switch distro's because of a security feature being included to help protect your whole system from being compromised from an attacker even though you could choose to disable it on your own. Let me guess, you also probably don't want a firewall enabled by default and don't want a patched kerenel against the Meltdown and Spectre vulnerabilities due to the possibility of a performance hit? Good luck to you in your next distro.

User avatar
stsoh
Forum Regular
Forum Regular
Posts: 412
Joined: Sun Aug 20, 2017 10:11 am

Re: Should MX have apparmor installed and configured by default like Ubuntu?

#13 Post by stsoh » Sun Feb 18, 2018 12:36 pm

linux already had selinux for security, adding another product.........is not good, still in wip (work-in-progress) since linux 2.6, restrictive, potential breakage, more administrative work for every apps added, etc. in other words why put more effort that does not work efficiently.
MX-17.1_x64 Horizon, G41M-P33 Combo(MS-7592), Pentium E5400 (min/max: 1203/2700 MHz), 8Gb RAM (800 MT/s),
Intel 4 Series Integrated Graphics, Realtek PCIe Fast RTL8101/2/6E, PCI Gigabit RTL8169 Ethernets.

User avatar
v3g4n
Forum Guide
Forum Guide
Posts: 1791
Joined: Sat Jan 16, 2016 8:20 pm

Re: Should MX have apparmor installed and configured by default like Ubuntu?

#14 Post by v3g4n » Sun Feb 18, 2018 1:02 pm

If you think that selinux is an alternative to apparmor on anything besides the rh distros you are so mistaken. Don't believe me, give it a try. Ive used apparmor on other distros and had no issue. You are clear to choose your own level of security, but lets not be so dramatic when a feature that I'm sure plenty would appreciate is included and enabled by default someday.

User avatar
stsoh
Forum Regular
Forum Regular
Posts: 412
Joined: Sun Aug 20, 2017 10:11 am

Re: Should MX have apparmor installed and configured by default like Ubuntu?

#15 Post by stsoh » Sun Feb 18, 2018 1:47 pm

alrite, it is not activated. no harm done if uninstall libapparmor will break mx. :footinmouth:
MX-17.1_x64 Horizon, G41M-P33 Combo(MS-7592), Pentium E5400 (min/max: 1203/2700 MHz), 8Gb RAM (800 MT/s),
Intel 4 Series Integrated Graphics, Realtek PCIe Fast RTL8101/2/6E, PCI Gigabit RTL8169 Ethernets.

User avatar
Raymzap
Forum Regular
Forum Regular
Posts: 104
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2014 9:40 am

Re: Should MX have apparmor installed and configured by default like Ubuntu?

#16 Post by Raymzap » Sun Feb 18, 2018 3:11 pm

So are Vanilla Debian and MX, etc. secure even if they don't currently use apparmor, selinux, or similar?
GNU/Linux User #470660

Linus Torvalds: "Microsoft isn't evil, they just make really crappy operating systems."

User avatar
anticapitalista
Forum Veteran
Forum Veteran
Posts: 5737
Joined: Sat Jul 15, 2006 10:40 am

Re: Should MX have apparmor installed and configured by default like Ubuntu?

#17 Post by anticapitalista » Sun Feb 18, 2018 5:00 pm

stsoh wrote:alrite, it is not activated. no harm done if uninstall libapparmor will break mx. :footinmouth:
dbus depends on libapparmor1 in stretch (and buster and sid)

https://packages.debian.org/stretch/dbus

If you really don't want it then you will have to use a pre-stretch version of Debian (MX-16)
anticapitalista
Reg. linux user #395339.

Philosophers have interpreted the world in many ways; the point is to change it.

antiX-17 "Heather Heyer" - lean and mean.
https://antixlinux.com

skidoo
Forum Regular
Forum Regular
Posts: 890
Joined: Tue Sep 22, 2015 6:56 pm

Re: Should MX have apparmor installed and configured by default like Ubuntu?

#18 Post by skidoo » Sun Feb 18, 2018 5:19 pm

So are Vanilla Debian and MX, etc. secure even if they don't currently use apparmor, selinux, or similar?
If I say "yes", will you believe me?

It's sad that folks don't recognize the ridiculousness of posting to ask such vague/overarching questions.
Raymzap, please websearch and educate yourself.
stsoh, please stop barking at the moon.

User avatar
Raymzap
Forum Regular
Forum Regular
Posts: 104
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2014 9:40 am

Re: Should MX have apparmor installed and configured by default like Ubuntu?

#19 Post by Raymzap » Tue Feb 20, 2018 2:24 pm

skidoo wrote:
So are Vanilla Debian and MX, etc. secure even if they don't currently use apparmor, selinux, or similar?
If I say "yes", will you believe me?

It's sad that folks don't recognize the ridiculousness of posting to ask such vague/overarching questions.
Raymzap, please websearch and educate yourself.
stsoh, please stop barking at the moon.
Ok, I'll take it as a yes.

The topic is tricky and I already did a web search. I came here to try to get a more solid answer.
GNU/Linux User #470660

Linus Torvalds: "Microsoft isn't evil, they just make really crappy operating systems."

User avatar
stsoh
Forum Regular
Forum Regular
Posts: 412
Joined: Sun Aug 20, 2017 10:11 am

Re: Should MX have apparmor installed and configured by default like Ubuntu?

#20 Post by stsoh » Wed Feb 21, 2018 12:19 am

alrite, it is simple to disable apparmor if it is activated in future.
add apparmor=0 in kernel parameters.
edit /etc/default/grub file. update-grub n reboot.

Code: Select all

GRUB_CMDLINE_LINUX_DEFAULT="quiet splash apparmor=0"
for those doesn't know how to do this, use grub customizer as in pic, save, exit n reboot.

note:
two securities maybe the cause of app breakages over the years.
in the future, when there are both selinux and apparmor securities are activated.
pick a one of these candies, apparmor=0 or selinux=0. choose your favor. :happy:
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
MX-17.1_x64 Horizon, G41M-P33 Combo(MS-7592), Pentium E5400 (min/max: 1203/2700 MHz), 8Gb RAM (800 MT/s),
Intel 4 Series Integrated Graphics, Realtek PCIe Fast RTL8101/2/6E, PCI Gigabit RTL8169 Ethernets.

Post Reply

Return to “Software / Configuration”