Bug#1011426: bullseye-pu: package tcpdump/4.99.0-2+deb11u1
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
Tags: bullseye
User: release.debian.org@packages.debian.org
Usertags: pu
Hi,
I would like to update the AppArmor profile for tcpdump in bullseye to
match the one in bookworm; the changes don't really qualify for a stable
update per se, but they are trivial and would be important
quality-of-life improvements for users who are not knowledgeable about
AppArmor and don't understand why they get -EPERM in some cases.
The update would fix the following bugs (both "normal"):
* "AppArmor grants access to *.pcap but not *.cap"
https://bugs.debian.org/989433
* "apparmor profile prevents -C -W"
https://bugs.debian.org/1010688
Full debdiff is attached.
Thanks.
diffstat for tcpdump-4.99.0 tcpdump-4.99.0
changelog | 8 ++++++++
usr.bin.tcpdump | 4 ++++
2 files changed, 12 insertions(+)
diff -Nru tcpdump-4.99.0/debian/changelog tcpdump-4.99.0/debian/changelog
--- tcpdump-4.99.0/debian/changelog 2021-01-15 23:41:47.000000000 +0100
+++ tcpdump-4.99.0/debian/changelog 2022-05-22 18:22:50.000000000 +0200
@@ -1,3 +1,11 @@
+tcpdump (4.99.0-2+deb11u1) bullseye; urgency=medium
+
+ * Minor AppArmor profile updates (debian/usr.bin.tcpdump):
+ + Grant access to *.cap (closes: #989433).
+ + Account for numerical suffix in filenames added by -W (closes: #1010688).
+
+ -- Romain Francoise <rfrancoise@debian.org> Sun, 22 May 2022 18:22:50 +0200
+
tcpdump (4.99.0-2) unstable; urgency=medium
* Add autopkgtest support, running the upstream test suite.
diff -Nru tcpdump-4.99.0/debian/usr.bin.tcpdump tcpdump-4.99.0/debian/usr.bin.tcpdump
--- tcpdump-4.99.0/debian/usr.bin.tcpdump 2021-01-03 21:25:50.000000000 +0100
+++ tcpdump-4.99.0/debian/usr.bin.tcpdump 2022-05-22 18:19:03.000000000 +0200
@@ -54,6 +54,10 @@
# for -r, -F and -w
/**.[pP][cC][aA][pP] rw,
+ /**.[cC][aA][pP] rw,
+ # -W adds a numerical suffix
+ /**.[pP][cC][aA][pP][0-9]* rw,
+ /**.[cC][aA][pP][0-9]* rw,
# for convenience with -r (ie, read pcap files from other sources)
/var/log/snort/*log* r,
Reply to: