You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
I just tried to start firefox with --private and --dbus-user=none and it failed because firefox.profile sets dbus-user filter and firejail does not allow relaxing the policy. Error: Cannot relax dbus-user policy, it is already set to block. IMHO the must common case is that a user wants to deny dbus access per run or default and add dbus-user none to xxx.local or the command line and shouldn't need to also add ignore dbus-user filter.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
The idea was to prevent setting a weaker DBus policy without explicitly authorizing the weakening with --ignore. But it seems I was a bit overzealous, as this effectively prevents strengthening the policy (if the (--dbus-user= options are not in the right order) also.
I think it would be safe to downgrade this to a warning, and keep the stricter policy of the two specified. I'll add this to #3406.
kris7t
added a commit
to kris7t/firejail
that referenced
this issue
May 8, 2020
I just tried to start firefox with
--private
and--dbus-user=none
and it failed because firefox.profile setsdbus-user filter
and firejail does not allow relaxing the policy.Error: Cannot relax dbus-user policy, it is already set to block
. IMHO the must common case is that a user wants to deny dbus access per run or default and adddbus-user none
to xxx.local or the command line and shouldn't need to also addignore dbus-user filter
.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: