linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v24 21/25] audit: add support for non-syscall auxiliary records

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: <CAHC9VhRFQDoNwhdLf4FEJKZzrVq3a5nnAkWS373JSbabdj3Pow@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 26 Jan 2021 15:05:32 -0500
From:   Paul Moore <paul@...l-moore.com>
To:     Casey Schaufler <casey@...aufler-ca.com>
Cc:     Richard Guy Briggs <rgb@...hat.com>, casey.schaufler@...el.com,
        James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org>,
        linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org, selinux@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-audit@...hat.com, keescook@...omium.org,
        john.johansen@...onical.com, penguin-kernel@...ove.sakura.ne.jp,
        Stephen Smalley <sds@...ho.nsa.gov>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v24 21/25] audit: add support for non-syscall auxiliary records

On Tue, Jan 26, 2021 at 1:58 PM Casey Schaufler <casey@...aufler-ca.com> wrote:
>
> On 1/26/2021 10:42 AM, Richard Guy Briggs wrote:
> > On 2021-01-26 08:41, Casey Schaufler wrote:
> >> Standalone audit records have the timestamp and serial number generated
> >> on the fly and as such are unique, making them standalone.  This new
> >> function audit_alloc_local() generates a local audit context that will
> >> be used only for a standalone record and its auxiliary record(s).  The
> >> context is discarded immediately after the local associated records are
> >> produced.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Richard Guy Briggs <rgb@...hat.com>
> >> Signed-off-by: Casey Schaufler <casey@...aufler-ca.com>
> >> Cc: linux-audit@...hat.com
> >> To: Richard Guy Briggs <rgb@...hat.com>
> > This has been minorly bothering me for several revisions...  Is there a
> > way for the development/authorship to be accurately reflected
> > if/when this patch is merged before the contid patch set?
>
> I don't know the right way to do that because I had to pull
> some of what was in the original patch out. Any way you would
> like it done is fine with me.

I'm not sure if there is one perfect way.  I typically see either a
"From: " line if the author is different from the submitter, or in
more complex cases such as this it seems like a simple note giving
credit in the description might be the best option.

-- 
paul moore
www.paul-moore.com