[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1591722896.5567.31.camel@linux.ibm.com>
Date: Tue, 09 Jun 2020 13:14:56 -0400
From: Mimi Zohar <zohar@...ux.ibm.com>
To: Lakshmi Ramasubramanian <nramas@...ux.microsoft.com>,
Steve Grubb <sgrubb@...hat.com>
Cc: linux-audit@...hat.com, paul@...l-moore.com,
linux-integrity@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] IMA: Add audit log for failure conditions
On Tue, 2020-06-09 at 10:00 -0700, Lakshmi Ramasubramanian wrote:
> On 6/9/20 9:43 AM, Steve Grubb wrote:
>
> >> The number in parenthesis is the error code (such as ENOMEM, EINVAL,
> >> etc.) IMA uses this format for reporting TPM errors in one of the audit
> >> messages (In ima_add_template_entry()). I followed the same pattern.
> >>
> >> Would it be better if the value for "cause" is formatted as
> >>
> >> cause=hashing_error_-22
> >>
> >> cause=alloc_entry_-12
> >
> > Neither fit the name=value style that all other events follow. What would fit
> > the style is something like this:
> >
> > cause=hashing_error errno=-22
> >
> > cause=alloc_entry errno=-12
> >
> > Would this be OK? Also, errno is only to illustrate. You can name it
> > something else as long as there are no use case collisions with our
> > dictionary of field names.
> >
> > https://github.com/linux-audit/audit-documentation/blob/master/specs/fields/
> > field-dictionary.csv
>
> I am fine with this.
>
> "errno" is currently not listed in the dictionary of audit message field
> names (Thanks for the pointer to this one Steve)
>
> Mimi - please let me know if you have any concerns with adding the
> "result" code in "errno" field in integrity_audit_msg().
>
> Sample message:
>
> [ 8.051937] audit: type=1804 audit(1591633422.365:8): pid=1 uid=0
> auid=4294967295 ses=4294967295 subj=system_u:system_r:init_t:s0
> op=measuring_keys cause=hashing_error errno=-22 comm="systemd"
> name=".builtin_trusted_keys" res=0
Yes, that's fine.
Mimi
Powered by blists - more mailing lists