[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <5cc042be-a3cf-ae39-c4f5-e474d02c0613@linux.microsoft.com>
Date: Wed, 10 Jun 2020 18:58:45 -0700
From: Lakshmi Ramasubramanian <nramas@...ux.microsoft.com>
To: Paul Moore <paul@...l-moore.com>
Cc: zohar@...ux.ibm.com, sgrubb@...hat.com, rgb@...hat.com,
linux-integrity@...r.kernel.org, linux-audit@...hat.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] integrity: Add errno field in audit message
On 6/10/20 6:45 PM, Paul Moore wrote:
Hi Paul,
> I'm sorry I didn't get a chance to mention this before you posted this
> patch, but for the past several years we have been sticking with a
> policy of only adding new fields to the end of existing records;
> please adjust this patch accordingly. Otherwise, this looks fine to
> me.
>
>> audit_log_untrustedstring(ab, get_task_comm(name, current));
>> if (fname) {
>> audit_log_format(ab, " name=");
>> --
Steve mentioned that since this new field "errno" is not a searchable
entry, it can be added anywhere in the audit log message.
But I have no problem moving this to the end of the audit record.
thanks,
-lakshmi
Powered by blists - more mailing lists