[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20180518095636.56ff322d@ivy-bridge>
Date: Fri, 18 May 2018 09:56:36 -0400
From: Steve Grubb <sgrubb@...hat.com>
To: Richard Guy Briggs <rgb@...hat.com>
Cc: cgroups@...r.kernel.org, containers@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
linux-api@...r.kernel.org,
Linux-Audit Mailing List <linux-audit@...hat.com>,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, ebiederm@...ssion.com, luto@...nel.org,
jlayton@...hat.com, carlos@...hat.com, dhowells@...hat.com,
viro@...iv.linux.org.uk, simo@...hat.com, eparis@...isplace.org,
serge@...lyn.com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH ghak32 V2 01/13] audit: add container id
On Thu, 17 May 2018 17:56:00 -0400
Richard Guy Briggs <rgb@...hat.com> wrote:
> > During syscall events, the path info is returned in a a record
> > simply called AUDIT_PATH, cwd info is returned in AUDIT_CWD. So,
> > rather than calling the record that gets attached to everything
> > AUDIT_CONTAINER_INFO, how about simply AUDIT_CONTAINER.
>
> Considering the container initiation record is different than the
> record to document the container involved in an otherwise normal
> syscall, we need two names. I don't have a strong opinion what they
> are.
>
> I'd prefer AUDIT_CONTAIN and AUDIT_CONTAINER_INFO so that the two
> are different enough to be visually distinct while leaving
> AUDIT_CONTAINERID for the field type in patch 4 ("audit: add
> containerid filtering")
How about AUDIT_CONTAINER for the auxiliary record? The one that starts
the container, I don't have a strong opinion on. Could be
AUDIT_CONTAINER_INIT, AUDIT_CONTAINER_START, AUDIT_CONTAINERID,
AUDIT_CONTAINER_ID, or something else. The API call that sets the ID
for filtering could be AUDIT_CID or AUDIT_CONTID if that helps decide
what the initial event might be. Normally, it should match the field
being filtered.
Best Regards,
-Steve
Powered by blists - more mailing lists