linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] tracer for sys_open()

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, 9 Feb 2009 14:54:31 +0100
From:	Karel Zak <kzak@...hat.com>
To:	Harald Hoyer <harald@...hat.com>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, power@...host.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] tracer for sys_open() - sreadahead

On Mon, Feb 09, 2009 at 02:23:35PM +0100, Harald Hoyer wrote:
> Karel Zak wrote:
>> On Thu, Feb 05, 2009 at 03:44:42PM +0100, Harald Hoyer wrote:
>>> Ingo Molnar wrote:
>>>> * Pavel Machek <pavel@...e.cz> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Tue 2009-01-27 12:08:04, Kok, Auke wrote:
>>>>>> This tracer monitors regular file open() syscalls. This is a fast
>>>>>> and low-overhead alternative to strace, and does not allow or
>>>>>> require to be attached to every process.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The tracer only logs succesfull calls, as those are the only ones we
>>>>>> are currently interested in, and we can determine the absolute path
>>>>>> of these files as we log.
>>>>> Maybe fanotify() should be used instead?
>>>>>
>>>>> Or maybe just plain strace? One slow boot should not really hurt...
>>>> ptrace is out of question for good tracing because it's not a  
>>>> transparent probe. (ptrace monopolizes the traced task - if we use 
>>>> that then we break regular strace usage.)
>>>>
>>>> 	Ingo
>>> Can strace can be used on init?
>>>
>>> $ man strace
>>> ...
>>>        On Linux, exciting as it would be, tracing the init process is forbidden.
>>> ...
>>>
>>> Any hope getting _any_ mechanism in the kernel??
>>
>>  Do you remember Linux Auditing System? That's RH's baby with hooks to
>>  all relevant syscalls. It would be better to fix/improve the current
>>  kernel mechanisms that introduce a new one.
>
> Yes, I do remember it, because this is how the current fedora readahead
> gathers its data. It delays the audit daemon, because there is no clean 
> way to hook into the stream. I asked to add a second "channel" (auditd 
> wants the kernel socket for its own)...

 yes, it'd be nice to support arbitrary number of connections and
 rules per connection. (.. or export audit stuff to userspace by a
 special pseudo filesystem (see cgroups, debugfs, ...)).

    Karel

-- 
 Karel Zak  <kzak@...hat.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/