linux-kernel - Re: [RFC] Create an audit record of USB specific details

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:	Mon, 4 Apr 2016 14:48:43 -0700
From:	Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:	Steve Grubb <sgrubb@...hat.com>
Cc:	linux-audit@...hat.com, wmealing <wmealing@...hat.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-usb@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC] Create an audit record of USB specific details

On Mon, Apr 04, 2016 at 05:33:10PM -0400, Steve Grubb wrote:
> On Monday, April 04, 2016 05:56:26 AM Greg KH wrote:
> > On Mon, Apr 04, 2016 at 12:02:42AM -0400, wmealing wrote:
> > > From: Wade Mealing <wmealing@...hat.com>
> > > 
> > > Gday,
> > > 
> > > I'm looking to create an audit trail for when devices are added or removed
> > > from the system.
> > 
> > Then please do it in userspace, as I suggested before, that way you
> > catch all types of devices, not just USB ones.
> > 
> > Also I don't think you realize that USB interfaces are what are bound to
> > drivers, not USB devices, so that is going to mess with any attempted
> > audit trails here.  How are you going to distinguish between the 5
> > different devices that just got plugged in that all have 0000/0000 as
> > vid/pid for them because they are "cheap" devices from China, yet do
> > totally different things because they are different _types_ of devices?
> 
> This sounds like vid/pid should be captured in the event.

The code did that, the point is, vid/pid means nothing in the real
world.  So why are you going to audit anything based on it? :)

> > Again, do this in userspace please, that is where it belongs.
> 
> There is one issue that may need some clarification. The audit system has to do 
> everything possible to make sure that an event is captured and logged. Does 
> the uevent netlink protocol ever drop events because the user space queue is 
> full? If the uevent interface drops events, then its not audit quality in 
> terms of doing everything possible to prevent the loss of a record. If this 
> were to happen, how would user space find out when a uevent gets dropped? I may 
> have to panic the machine if that happens depending on the configured policy. 
> So, we need to know when it happens. If on the otherhand it doesn't ever drop 
> events, then it might be usable.

I have never seen it drop events, have you?  It's been pretty reliable
for the past 10+ years :)

thanks,

greg k-h