linux-kernel - Re: Should audit_seccomp check 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: <CAGXu5j+TnB3=H1zx8j_RW1kEU3GQXDhPcP8Odej7oAyAoW_ZuQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Fri, 23 Oct 2015 10:01:50 -0700
From:	Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
To:	Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>
Cc:	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	linux-audit@...hat.com, Richard Guy Briggs <rgb@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: Should audit_seccomp check audit_enabled?

On Fri, Oct 23, 2015 at 9:19 AM, Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net> wrote:
> I would argue that, if auditing is off, audit_seccomp shouldn't do
> anything.  After all, unlike e.g. selinux, seccomp is not a systemwide
> policy, and seccomp signals might be ordinary behavior that's internal
> to the seccomp-using application.  IOW, for people with audit compiled
> in and subscribed by journald but switched off, I think that the
> records shouldn't be emitted.
>
> If you agree, I can send the two-line patch.

I think signr==0 states (which I would identify as "intended
behavior") don't need to be reported under any situation, but audit
folks wanted to keep it around.

-Kees

-- 
Kees Cook
Chrome OS Security
--
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/