[GH-ISSUE #3408] Allow --dbus-user=none on the command line for profiles with dbus-user filter #2140

New issue

Closed

opened 2026-05-05 08:49:05 -06:00 by gitea-mirror · 1 comment

gitea-mirror commented

2026-05-05 08:49:05 -06:00

Owner

Originally created by @rusty-snake on GitHub (May 7, 2020).
Original GitHub issue: https://github.com/netblue30/firejail/issues/3408

Originally assigned to: @kris7t on GitHub.

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.

Originally created by @rusty-snake on GitHub (May 7, 2020). Original GitHub issue: https://github.com/netblue30/firejail/issues/3408 Originally assigned to: @kris7t on GitHub. 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`.

gitea-mirror closed this issue

2026-05-05 08:49:06 -06:00

gitea-mirror commented

2026-05-05 08:49:08 -06:00

Author

Owner

@kris7t commented on GitHub (May 8, 2020):

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 commented on GitHub (May 8, 2020): 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.

No milestone

No project

No assignees

1 participant

Notifications

Due date

The due date is invalid or out of range. Please use the format "yyyy-mm-dd".

No due date set.

Dependencies

No dependencies set.

Reference: github-starred/firejail#2140

No description provided.

Rows
Columns