linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH ghak25 v3 3/3] audit: add subj creds to NETFILTER

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]

Date:   Wed, 18 Mar 2020 17:22:12 -0400
From:   Paul Moore <paul@...l-moore.com>
To:     Richard Guy Briggs <rgb@...hat.com>
Cc:     Linux-Audit Mailing List <linux-audit@...hat.com>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        netfilter-devel@...r.kernel.org, twoerner@...hat.com,
        Eric Paris <eparis@...isplace.org>, fw@...len.de,
        ebiederm@...ssion.com, tgraf@...radead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH ghak25 v3 3/3] audit: add subj creds to NETFILTER_CFG
 record to cover async unregister

On Wed, Mar 18, 2020 at 9:12 AM Richard Guy Briggs <rgb@...hat.com> wrote:
> On 2020-03-17 17:30, Richard Guy Briggs wrote:
> > Some table unregister actions seem to be initiated by the kernel to
> > garbage collect unused tables that are not initiated by any userspace
> > actions.  It was found to be necessary to add the subject credentials to
> > cover this case to reveal the source of these actions.  A sample record:
> >
> >   type=NETFILTER_CFG msg=audit(2020-03-11 21:25:21.491:269) : table=nat family=bridge entries=0 op=unregister pid=153 uid=root auid=unset tty=(none) ses=unset subj=system_u:system_r:kernel_t:s0 comm=kworker/u4:2 exe=(null)
>
> Given the precedent set by bpf unload, I'd really rather drop this patch
> that adds subject credentials.
>
> Similarly with ghak25's subject credentials, but they were already
> present and that would change an existing record format, so it isn't
> quite as justifiable in that case.

Your comments have me confused - do you want this patch (v3 3/3)
considered for merging or no?

-- 
paul moore
www.paul-moore.com