netdev - Re: [RFC PATCH ghak32 V2 01/13] audit: add container id

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:   Thu, 29 Mar 2018 05:01:32 -0400
From:   Richard Guy Briggs <rgb@...hat.com>
To:     Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>
Cc:     cgroups@...r.kernel.org, containers@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
        linux-api@...r.kernel.org,
        Linux-Audit Mailing List <linux-audit@...hat.com>,
        linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org, luto@...nel.org, jlayton@...hat.com,
        carlos@...hat.com, viro@...iv.linux.org.uk, dhowells@...hat.com,
        simo@...hat.com, eparis@...isplace.org, serge@...lyn.com,
        ebiederm@...ssion.com, madzcar@...il.com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH ghak32 V2 01/13] audit: add container id

On 2018-03-28 12:39, Jonathan Corbet wrote:
> On Fri, 16 Mar 2018 05:00:28 -0400
> Richard Guy Briggs <rgb@...hat.com> wrote:
> > Implement the proc fs write to set the audit container ID of a process,
> > emitting an AUDIT_CONTAINER record to document the event.
> 
> A little detail, but still...

I am understanding that you would prefer more context (as opposed to
operational detail) in the description, laying out the use case for this
patch(set)?

> > +static int audit_set_containerid_perm(struct task_struct *task, u64 containerid)
> > +{
> > +	struct task_struct *parent;
> > +	u64 pcontainerid, ccontainerid;
> > +
> > +	/* Don't allow to set our own containerid */
> > +	if (current == task)
> > +		return -EPERM;
> > +	/* Don't allow the containerid to be unset */
> > +	if (!cid_valid(containerid))
> > +		return -EINVAL;
> 
> I went looking for cid_valid(), but it turns out you don't add it until
> patch 5.  That, I expect, will not be good for bisectability (or patch
> review).

Nice catch, thanks Jon.  That is very likely another victim of a git
rebase to re-order afterthoughts in the right place.  I'll need to be
more careful of that class of bug, rethink my workflow, or script builds
to verify each commit is compilable.

> Thanks,
> 
> jon

- RGB

--
Richard Guy Briggs <rgb@...hat.com>
Sr. S/W Engineer, Kernel Security, Base Operating Systems
Remote, Ottawa, Red Hat Canada
IRC: rgb, SunRaycer
Voice: +1.647.777.2635, Internal: (81) 32635