Bug#857798: Please add an AppArmor profile for Pulseaudio

Ulrike Uhlig ulrike at debian.org
Wed Mar 15 13:27:00 UTC 2017

Hi Felipe,

thank you for your answer.

Felipe Sateler:
> On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 5:07 AM, Ulrike Uhlig <ulrike at debian.org> wrote:
>> Package: pulseaudio

> I have some doubts:
> 1. What is the benefit of shipping the profile info in pulseaudio
> versus shipping it in the apparmor-profiles package?

The ultimate aim of the Debian AppArmor team is to have all profiles
shipped in their respective packages. Why? Because the package
maintainers are the ones who know how their package should work and they
are ideally placed to see when something is wrong.

This is also what Ubuntu is doing by the way. They have enabled AppArmor
by default since years to provide users with Mandatory Access Control.

Furthermore, the apparmor-profiles-extra package is supposed to disappear.

> 2. Wouldn't that benefit be best achieved if the profile was shipped
> by (pulse) upstream?

> I'm wary of being in charge of stuff I don't use, and I would think

You should use this kind of stuff ;)
It's super easy to setup see https://wiki.debian.org/AppArmor/HowToUse

> upstream would be as well. Would apparmor maintainers be willing to
> step in to help when problems appear with the profile?

Absolutely. To help you here, we (the AppArmor team) have set up this
documentation: https://wiki.debian.org/AppArmor/Debug If ever people
report bugs against Pulseaudio related to AppArmor, you can invoke help
by the AppArmor team by usertagging such bugs so they will appear on our

Furthermore, the upstream authors are very responsive, and I'm convinced
they react quickly. FYI upstream can be contacted through
apparmor at lists.ubuntu.com

>> I'll try to prepare a patch to make it easier for you to integrate it.
> That would be great.



More information about the pkg-pulseaudio-devel mailing list