linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH V2] audit: log module name on init

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: <4894541.cmgDuFZMe5@x2>
Date:   Tue, 14 Feb 2017 13:43:44 -0500
From:   Steve Grubb <sgrubb@...hat.com>
To:     Paul Moore <paul@...l-moore.com>
Cc:     Richard Guy Briggs <rgb@...hat.com>, linux-audit@...hat.com,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Jessica Yu <jeyu@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V2] audit: log module name on init_module

On Tuesday, February 14, 2017 1:38:36 PM EST Paul Moore wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 14, 2017 at 1:11 PM, Richard Guy Briggs <rgb@...hat.com> wrote:
> > On 2017-02-14 13:02, Steve Grubb wrote:
> >> On Monday, February 13, 2017 4:20:55 PM EST Paul Moore wrote:
> >> > On Sat, Feb 4, 2017 at 1:10 PM, Richard Guy Briggs <rgb@...hat.com> 
wrote:
> >> > > This adds a new auxiliary record MODULE_INIT to the SYSCALL event.
> >> > > 
> >> > > We get finit_module for free since it made most sense to hook this in
> >> > > to
> >> > > load_module().
> >> > > 
> >> > > https://github.com/linux-audit/audit-kernel/issues/7
> >> > > https://github.com/linux-audit/audit-kernel/wiki/RFE-Module-load-reco
> >> > > rd-fo
> >> > > rmat
> >> > 
> >> > Correction for the record:
> >> > 
> >> > *
> >> > https://github.com/linux-audit/audit-kernel/wiki/RFE-Module-Load-Record
> >> > -For
> >> > mat
> >> > 
> >> > [NOTE: don't resend please, I'll fix this when merging]
> >> 
> >> OK. Support was added to user space for this record. While doing this, I
> >> wondered if we also get this auxiliary record when unloading a module?
> > 
> > I thought of that at the time, which influenced the design and wording.
> > It is not supported yet, but that should be easier to add.
> 
> As a reminder, this is currently in audit/next and will be going up to
> Linus next week during the merge window, if you want to change this
> record in some backwards incompatible way, e.g. putting a field before
> "name", you've got until the end of this week to figure that out.

This isn't necessary. The syscall used denotes the meaning of the action.

-Steve