linux-kernel - Re: Why is syscall auditing on with no rules?

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Sat, 1 Feb 2014 18:51:56 -0800
From:	Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>
To:	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>, Steve Grubb <sgrubb@...hat.com>,
	Eric Paris <eparis@...hat.com>, linux-audit@...hat.com,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Why is syscall auditing on with no rules?

On Sat, Feb 1, 2014 at 6:32 PM, Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net> wrote:
> On a stock Fedora installation:
>
> $ sudo auditctl -l
> No rules
>
> Nonetheless TIF_SYSCALL_AUDIT is set and the __audit_syscall_entry and
> __audit_syscall_exit account for >20% of syscall overhead according to
> perf.
>
> This sucks.  Unless I'm missing something, syscall auditing is *off*.
>
> How hard would it be to arrange for TIF_SYSCALL_AUDIT to be cleared
> when there are no syscall rules?
>
> (This is extra bad in kernels before 3.13, where the clear call for
> TIF_SYSCALL_AUDIT was completely missing.)

The current code seems to have really odd effects.  For example,
processes that are created before the very first auditctl -e 1 (or
auditd) invocation will never be subject to syscall auditing.  But
auditctl -e 1; auditctl -e 0 will cause all subsequently started
processes to have audit contexts allocated and therefore to be subject
to syscall auditing.

I doubt that this behavior is considered desirable.

--Andy

>
> --Andy



-- 
Andy Lutomirski
AMA Capital Management, LLC
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/