linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] audit: do a quick exit when syscall number is invalid

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: <6243f1d7.1c69fb81.b19c7.7ec1@mx.google.com>
Date:   Wed, 30 Mar 2022 05:59:49 +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 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


> -- 
> paul-moore.com