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: <CAHC9VhTxACMG=V_J1OYy_7VjM3LjuNJcwJSf6om1eO8esCDAbg@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Wed, 30 Mar 2022 10:48:12 -0400
From:   Paul Moore <paul@...l-moore.com>
To:     CGEL <cgel.zte@...il.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 Wed, Mar 30, 2022 at 1:59 AM CGEL <cgel.zte@...il.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 29, 2022 at 09:11:19AM -0400, Paul Moore wrote:
> > On Mon, Mar 28, 2022 at 11:22 PM CGEL <cgel.zte@...il.com> wrote:
> > > 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
> >
> > You can add an audit filter without explicitly specifying a syscall:
> >
> > % auditctl -a exit,always -F auid=1000
> > % auditctl -l
> > -a always,exit -S all -F auid=1000
> >
> I have tried this, and execute program which call syscall number is -1,
> audit still didn't record it. It supports that there's no need for audit
> to handle syscall number less than 0.
>
> sh-4.2# auditctl -a exit,always
> sh-4.2# auditctl -l
> -a always,exit -S all

If audit is not generating SYSCALL records, even for invalid/ENOSYS
syscalls, I would consider that a bug which should be fixed.

-- 
paul-moore.com

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ