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: <CAHC9VhRYHhHPx42BKa0gp974uzwHoXZWqmwt9o=1rox7tHyy1w@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Fri, 1 Apr 2022 10:16:45 -0400
From:   Paul Moore <paul@...l-moore.com>
To:     Steve Grubb <sgrubb@...hat.com>
Cc:     linux-audit@...hat.com, CGEL <cgel.zte@...il.com>,
        kbuild-all@...ts.01.org, Zeal Robot <zealci@....com.cn>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, eparis@...hat.com,
        dai.shixin@....com.cn, Yang Yang <yang.yang29@....com.cn>,
        ink@...assic.park.msu.ru, huang.junhua@....com.cn,
        guo.xiaofeng@....com.cn, mattst88@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] audit: do a quick exit when syscall number is invalid

On Fri, Apr 1, 2022 at 9:39 AM Steve Grubb <sgrubb@...hat.com> wrote:
>
> On Thursday, March 31, 2022 9:57:05 PM EDT CGEL wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 31, 2022 at 10:16:23AM -0400, Paul Moore wrote:
> > > On Wed, Mar 30, 2022 at 10:29 PM CGEL <cgel.zte@...il.com> wrote:
> > > > On Wed, Mar 30, 2022 at 10:48:12AM -0400, Paul Moore wrote:
> > > > > If audit is not generating SYSCALL records, even for invalid/ENOSYS
> > > > > syscalls, I would consider that a bug which should be fixed.
> > > >
> > > > If we fix this bug, do you think audit invalid/ENOSYS syscalls better
> > > > be forcible or be a rule that can be configure? I think configure is
> > > > better.
> > >
> > > It isn't clear to me exactly what you are asking, but I would expect
> > > the existing audit syscall filtering mechanism to work regardless if
> > > the syscall is valid or not.
> >
> > Thanks, I try to make it more clear. We found that auditctl would only
> > set rule with syscall number (>=0 && <2047) ...

That is exactly why I wrote the warning below in my response ...

> > > Beware that there are some limitations
> > > to the audit syscall filter, which are unfortunately baked into the
> > > current design/implementation, which may affect this to some extent.

-- 
paul-moore.com

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ