linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v1 0/2] two suggested iouring op audit updates

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: <CAHC9VhRpu7WZDqWKcLDj18A0Z5FJdUU=eUL3wbJH1CnEBWB4GA@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Fri, 27 Jan 2023 17:53:24 -0500
From:   Paul Moore <paul@...l-moore.com>
To:     Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>
Cc:     Richard Guy Briggs <rgb@...hat.com>,
        Linux-Audit Mailing List <linux-audit@...hat.com>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, io-uring@...r.kernel.org,
        Eric Paris <eparis@...isplace.org>,
        Steve Grubb <sgrubb@...hat.com>, Stefan Roesch <shr@...com>,
        Christian Brauner <brauner@...nel.org>,
        Pavel Begunkov <asml.silence@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 0/2] two suggested iouring op audit updates

On Fri, Jan 27, 2023 at 5:46 PM Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk> wrote:
> On 1/27/23 3:38 PM, Paul Moore wrote:
> > On Fri, Jan 27, 2023 at 2:43 PM Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk> wrote:
> >> On 1/27/23 12:42 PM, Paul Moore wrote:
> >>> On Fri, Jan 27, 2023 at 12:40 PM Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk> wrote:
> >>>> On 1/27/23 10:23 AM, Richard Guy Briggs wrote:
> >>>>> A couple of updates to the iouring ops audit bypass selections suggested in
> >>>>> consultation with Steve Grubb.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Richard Guy Briggs (2):
> >>>>>   io_uring,audit: audit IORING_OP_FADVISE but not IORING_OP_MADVISE
> >>>>>   io_uring,audit: do not log IORING_OP_*GETXATTR
> >>>>>
> >>>>>  io_uring/opdef.c | 4 +++-
> >>>>>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >>>>
> >>>> Look fine to me - we should probably add stable to both of them, just
> >>>> to keep things consistent across releases. I can queue them up for 6.3.
> >>>
> >>> Please hold off until I've had a chance to look them over ...
> >>
> >> I haven't taken anything yet, for things like this I always let it
> >> simmer until people have had a chance to do so.
> >
> > Thanks.  FWIW, that sounds very reasonable to me, but I've seen lots
> > of different behaviors across subsystems and wanted to make sure we
> > were on the same page.
>
> Sounds fair. BTW, can we stop CC'ing closed lists on patch
> submissions? Getting these:
>
> Your message to Linux-audit awaits moderator approval
>
> on every reply is really annoying.

We kinda need audit related stuff on the linux-audit list, that's our
mailing list for audit stuff.

However, I agree that it is crap that the linux-audit list is
moderated, but unfortunately that isn't something I control (I haven't
worked for RH in years, and even then the list owner was really weird
about managing the list).  Occasionally I grumble about moving the
kernel audit development to a linux-audit list on vger but haven't
bothered yet, perhaps this is as good a reason as any.

Richard, Steve - any chance of opening the linux-audit list?

-- 
paul-moore.com