linux-kernel - [PATCH 0/1] audit_alloc: clear TIF_SYSCALL_AUDIT if !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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20130807180530.GA4916@redhat.com>
Date:	Wed, 7 Aug 2013 20:05:30 +0200
From:	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
To:	Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>, Eric Paris <eparis@...hat.com>,
	Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
Cc:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Zach Levis <zml@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH 0/1] audit_alloc: clear TIF_SYSCALL_AUDIT if !audit_context

Even if I am right the problem is really minor, the patch should
be ignored without the authoritative acks.

I am only sending it because I am curious, and I would like to ask
another question about audit.

search_binary_handler()->audit_bprm(bprm) looks a bit strange, and
I can't understand if this is on purpose or not.

It adds the the AUDIT_EXECVE record every time the (recursive)
search_binary_handler() is called for audit_log_exit() which flushes
them all. But probably we only need a single record ?

And it seems that audit_aux_data_execve->envc is not used at all.

Oleg.

--
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/