linux-kernel - Re: [RFC][PATCH -v2] Smack: Integrate with Audit

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]

Message-ID: <746579.84816.qm@web36612.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Date:	Wed, 12 Mar 2008 08:40:15 -0700 (PDT)
From:	Casey Schaufler <casey@...aufler-ca.com>
To:	Stephen Smalley <sds@...ho.nsa.gov>,
	"Ahmed S. Darwish" <darwish.07@...il.com>
Cc:	Casey Schaufler <casey@...aufler-ca.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org>,
	Paul Moore <paul.moore@...com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	LSM-ML <linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org>,
	Audit-ML <linux-audit@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH -v2] Smack: Integrate with Audit


--- Stephen Smalley <sds@...ho.nsa.gov> wrote:

> 
> On Wed, 2008-03-12 at 04:44 +0200, Ahmed S. Darwish wrote:
> > Hi!,
> > 
> > Setup the new Audit hooks for Smack. The AUDIT_SUBJ_USER and 
> > AUDIT_OBJ_USER SELinux flags are recycled to avoid `auditd' 
> > userspace modifications. Smack only needs auditing on 
> > a subject/object bases, so those flags were enough.
> 
> Only question I have is whether audit folks are ok with reuse of the
> flags in this manner, and whether the _USER flag is best suited for this
> purpose if you are going to reuse an existing flag (since Smack label
> seems more like a SELinux type than a SELinux user).

To-mate-o toe-maht-o.

There really doesn't seem to be any real reason to create a new
flag just because the granularity is different. The choice between
_USER and _TYPE (and _ROLE for that matter) is arbitrary from a
functional point of view. I say that since Smack has users, but
not types or roles, _USER makes the most sense.

> Certainly will confuse matters if a user has audit filters on SELinux
> users in their /etc/audit/audit.rules and then boots a kernel with Smack
> enabled.

Somehow I doubt that will be their biggest concern.


Casey Schaufler
casey@...aufler-ca.com
--
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/