Trying to revive 'ubtd' (Bluetooth file transfer)

gpatel-fr

@PhAndersson said in Trying to revive 'ubtd' (Bluetooth file transfer):

AuthorizePush

this is denied; I never dabbled much with Apparmor, and certainly not with UT; I notice with some dismay that there are no apparmor logs and I have no clear idea on the better way to enable them unfortunately.

For now, I have only one positive thing to say: in the application that worked with 16.04, the template was set to 'unconfined'; while this is not generally a great idea, to advance your testing maybe it could be worth a try to add it to the apparmor profile ?

PhAndersson

@gpatel-fr said in Trying to revive 'ubtd' (Bluetooth file transfer):

For now, I have only one positive thing to say: in the application that worked with 16.04, the template was set to 'unconfined'; while this is not generally a great idea, to advance your testing maybe it could be worth a try to add it to the apparmor profile ?

Yes, you're right -- it's certainly worth a try.

PhAndersson

Well, good news! With the "unconfined" AA profile, the app works

The phone successfully received a .jpeg file sent over BT from my laptop:

gpatel-fr

@PhAndersson

Great ! have happy file exchanges with your car

lduboeuf

@PhAndersson said in Trying to revive 'ubtd' (Bluetooth file transfer):

Well, good news! With the "unconfined" AA profile, the app works

The phone successfully received a .jpeg file sent over BT from my laptop:

Congrats, So some changes are needed on UT to make it work ?

PhAndersson

@gpatel-fr said in Trying to revive 'ubtd' (Bluetooth file transfer):

@PhAndersson

Great ! have happy file exchanges with your car

That won't work yet, unfortunately. For this, I need the SharePlugin to work. That one still crashes as soon as I select it which causes the phone to restart.

More troubleshooting needed

PhAndersson

@lduboeuf said in Trying to revive 'ubtd' (Bluetooth file transfer):

Congrats, So some changes are needed on UT to make it work ?

If your question is: did I need to hack my phone to make the app work in its current state, then the answer is no. As suggested by @gpatel-fr, I just gave it an "unconfined" AA profile (which I understand would prevent me from publishing it on the OpenStore).

So eventually an updated bluetooth AppArmor Policy Group would be needed, I guess (or a extra one dedicated to OBEX).

projectmoon

@PhAndersson I think any spawning of external processes that are not inside the app's ~/.local/share directory require unconfined. And in this case, unconfined would be required since it's using some system executable.

gpatel-fr

@projectmoon said in Trying to revive 'ubtd' (Bluetooth file transfer):

I think any spawning of external processes that are not inside the app's ~/.local/share directory require unconfined.

If 'running an external process' means 'activating a service' via dbusk, not 'spawning', it can be done from confined I think. I did not check how exactly is working this application.

gpatel-fr

@PhAndersson said in Trying to revive 'ubtd' (Bluetooth file transfer):

prevent me from publishing it on the OpenStore

Not sure of that actually, there are applications with a big red scary warning, that do not prevent them to be published.

Also, IIRC the idea on phone OS is that the app is shipped with granular authorizations policy and the user grant these rights or not. I don't see why you could not ship a granular apparmor policy for the app if you wanted to do so.