[09:28]  * chromebittin is listening to this years first episode
[18:29] <marler8997> Hello, I'm trying to understand what security libsecret provides over files with 0700 permissions.  It seems like all processes running as the current user can access all secrets, so does it actually add any security?
[18:46] <JanC> the point is that only the current user can access them, yes, without needing to implement N different ways to access different storage backends
[18:47] <JanC> also, without needing to learn how to use dbus, etc.
[18:49] <mdeslaur> it protects against offline attacks, and ensures that the crypto being used is reasonable instead of having each app do their own, etc.
[18:50] <mdeslaur> and you get a single unlock with a pam module
[18:50] <mdeslaur> but it definitely doesn't protect a user against themselves
[18:51] <marler8997> it would only protect against "offline attacks" if libsecret is secured with a password right?  (My understanding is implementation can choose to do this or not)
[18:52] <mdeslaur> definitely
[18:53] <marler8997> cool, thanks for the help/info
[18:58] <JanC> the "daemon" could (in theory, at least) also ask for a "global" password on every access, instead of unlocking it on login, or set other access policies, so it's not _necessarily_ true that all processes can access it at will  :)
[18:59] <JanC> and it can apparently also access passwords on a TPM, etc.
[20:09] <ahasenack> this is a bit odd, for a testcase, I populated a directory with a pattern of files that has some that should be excluded, some that shouldn't. But the warning I get is only about some of the exclusions, not all of them: https://pastebin.ubuntu.com/p/Q5gSfmdQh4/
[20:09] <ahasenack> I do verify in the test that the output of apparmor_parser -p does NOT contain any of the exclusions, so it's working
[20:09] <ahasenack> it's just the "Ignoring: ..." warning sent to stderr by apparmor_parser that doesn't mention the missing ones
[20:10] <ahasenack> I thought since they are not from dpkg file formats (pacman, rpm, etc), maybe we patched something out, but I couldn't find it
[20:24] <georgiag> ahasenack: I believe that's expected. some of them are silently ignored: https://gitlab.com/apparmor/apparmor/-/blob/master/libraries/libapparmor/src/private.c#L65 
[20:24] <georgiag> the last parameter is 1 if silently ignored
[20:24] <georgiag> I just don't know the reason :D
[20:25] <ahasenack> ohhhh