[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <62427b5c.1c69fb81.fc2a7.d1af@mx.google.com>
Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2022 03:22:01 +0000
From: CGEL <cgel.zte@...il.com>
To: Paul Moore <paul@...l-moore.com>
Cc: rth@...ddle.net, ink@...assic.park.msu.ru, mattst88@...il.com,
eparis@...hat.com, linux-audit@...hat.com, kbuild-all@...ts.01.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Yang Yang <yang.yang29@....com.cn>,
Zeal Robot <zealci@....com.cn>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] audit: do a quick exit when syscall number is invalid
On Mon, Mar 28, 2022 at 11:06:12PM -0400, Paul Moore wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 28, 2022 at 9:48 PM CGEL <cgel.zte@...il.com> wrote:
> > Sorry could anybody give a hand to solve this? It works well on x86_64 and arm64.
> > I have no alpha environment and not familiar to this arch, much thanks!
>
> Regardless of if this is fixed, I'm not convinced this is something we
> want to merge. After all, a process executed a syscall and we should
> process it like any other; just because it happens to be an
> unrecognized syscall on a particular kernel build doesn't mean it
> isn't security relevant (probing for specific syscall numbers may be a
> useful attack fingerprint).
>
Thanks for your reply.
But syscall number less than 0 is even invalid for auditctl. So we
will never hit this kind of audit rule. And invalid syscall number
will always cause failure early in syscall handle.
sh-4.2# auditctl -a always,exit -F arch=b64 -S -1
Syscall name unknown: -1
> --
> paul-moore.com
Powered by blists - more mailing lists