linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH ghak124 v3] audit: log nftables configuration change events

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: <20210218082207.GJ2766@breakpoint.cc>
Date:   Thu, 18 Feb 2021 09:22:07 +0100
From:   Florian Westphal <fw@...len.de>
To:     Richard Guy Briggs <rgb@...hat.com>
Cc:     Florian Westphal <fw@...len.de>, Phil Sutter <phil@....cc>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux-Audit Mailing List <linux-audit@...hat.com>,
        netfilter-devel@...r.kernel.org, twoerner@...hat.com,
        Eric Paris <eparis@...isplace.org>, tgraf@...radead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH ghak124 v3] audit: log nftables configuration change
 events

Richard Guy Briggs <rgb@...hat.com> wrote:
> On 2021-02-11 23:09, Florian Westphal wrote:
> > So, if just a summary is needed a single audit_log_nfcfg()
> > after 'step 3' and outside of the list_for_each_entry_safe() is all
> > that is needed.
> 
> Ok, so it should not matter if it is before or after that
> list_for_each_entry_safe(), which could be used to collect that summary.

Right, it won't matter.

> > If a summary is wanted as well one could fe. count the number of
> > transaction types in the batch, e.g. table adds, chain adds, rule
> > adds etc. and then log a summary count instead.
> 
> The current fields are "table", "family", "entries", "op".
> 
> Could one batch change more than one table?  (I think it could?)

Yes.

> It appears it can change more than one family.
> "family" is currently a single integer, so that might need to be changed
> to a list, or something to indicate multi-family.

Yes, it can also affect different families.

> Listing all the ops seems a bit onerous.  Is there a hierarchy to the
> ops and if so, are they in that order in a batch or in nf_tables_commit()?

No.  There is a hierarchy, e.g. you can't add a chain without first
adding a table, BUT in case the table was already created by an earlier
transaction it can also be stand-alone.

> It seems I'd need to filter out the NFT_MSG_GET_* ops.

No need, the GET ops do not cause changes and will not trigger a
generation id change.