linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] audit: set TIF_AUDIT_SYSCALL only if audit filter has been populated

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: <CALCETrUV9Q8o2TkydO7NNjHAQNsZM-m9nEV8n_XnoaE+RmGoXw@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Wed, 14 Mar 2018 00:22:22 +0000
From:   Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>
To:     Steve Grubb <sgrubb@...hat.com>
Cc:     Paul Moore <paul@...l-moore.com>, Jiri Kosina <jikos@...nel.org>,
        Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>, linux-audit@...hat.com,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>,
        Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] audit: set TIF_AUDIT_SYSCALL only if audit filter has
 been populated

On Sat, Mar 10, 2018 at 10:15 AM, Steve Grubb <sgrubb@...hat.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 7 Mar 2018 18:43:42 -0500
> Paul Moore <paul@...l-moore.com> wrote:
>> ... and I just realized that linux-audit isn't on the To/CC line,
>> adding them now.
>>
>> Link to the patch is below.
>>
>> * https://marc.info/?t=152041887600003&r=1&w=2
>
> Yes...I wished I was in on the beginning of this discussion. Here's the
> problem. We need all tasks auditable unless specifically dismissed as
> uninteresting. This would be a task,never rule.
>
> The way we look at it, is if it boots with audit=1, then we know auditd
> is expected to run at some point. So, we need all tasks to stay
> auditable. If they weren't and auditd enabled auditing, then we'd need
> to walk the whole proctable and stab TIF_AUDIT_SYSCALL into every
> process in the system. It was decided that this is too ugly.

When was that decided?  That's what this patch does.