netdev - Re: [PATCH ghak90 V6 05/10] audit: add contid support for signalling the audit daemon

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]

Date:   Tue, 9 Apr 2019 10:07:22 -0400
From:   Paul Moore <paul@...l-moore.com>
To:     Neil Horman <nhorman@...driver.com>
Cc:     Ondrej Mosnacek <omosnace@...hat.com>,
        Richard Guy Briggs <rgb@...hat.com>,
        containers@...ts.linux-foundation.org, linux-api@...r.kernel.org,
        Linux-Audit Mailing List <linux-audit@...hat.com>,
        linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org, netfilter-devel@...r.kernel.org,
        Steve Grubb <sgrubb@...hat.com>,
        David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
        Simo Sorce <simo@...hat.com>,
        Eric Paris <eparis@...isplace.org>,
        "Serge E. Hallyn" <serge@...lyn.com>,
        "Eric W . Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH ghak90 V6 05/10] audit: add contid support for signalling
 the audit daemon

On Tue, Apr 9, 2019 at 9:49 AM Neil Horman <nhorman@...driver.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 09, 2019 at 09:40:58AM -0400, Paul Moore wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 9, 2019 at 8:58 AM Ondrej Mosnacek <omosnace@...hat.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Tue, Apr 9, 2019 at 5:40 AM Richard Guy Briggs <rgb@...hat.com> wrote:
> > > > Add audit container identifier support to the action of signalling the
> > > > audit daemon.
> > > >
> > > > Since this would need to add an element to the audit_sig_info struct,
> > > > a new record type AUDIT_SIGNAL_INFO2 was created with a new
> > > > audit_sig_info2 struct.  Corresponding support is required in the
> > > > userspace code to reflect the new record request and reply type.
> > > > An older userspace won't break since it won't know to request this
> > > > record type.
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Richard Guy Briggs <rgb@...hat.com>
> > >
> > > This looks good to me.
> > >
> > > Reviewed-by: Ondrej Mosnacek <omosnace@...hat.com>
> > >
> > > Although I'm wondering if we shouldn't try to future-proof the
> > > AUDIT_SIGNAL_INFO2 format somehow, so that we don't need to add
> > > another AUDIT_SIGNAL_INFO3 when the need arises to add yet-another
> > > identifier to it... The simplest solution I can come up with is to add
> > > a "version" field at the beginning (set to 2 initially), then v<N>_len
> > > at the beginning of data for version <N>. But maybe this is too
> > > complicated for too little gain...
> >
> > FWIW, I believe the long term solution to this is the fabled netlink
> > attribute approach that we haven't talked about in some time, but I
> > keep dreaming about (it has been mostly on the back burner becasue 1)
> > time and 2) didn't want to impact the audit container ID work).  While
> > I'm not opposed to trying to make things like this a bit more robust
> > by adding version fields and similar things, there are still so many
> > (so very many) problems with the audit kernel/userspace interface that
> > still need to be addressed.
>
> Agreed, this change as-is is in keeping with the message structure that audit
> has today, and so is ok with me, but the long term goal should be a conversion
> to netlink attributes for all audit messages.  Thats a big undertaking and
> should be addressed separately though.

You've likely missed all the conversations around this from some time
ago, but this is the direction I want us to go towards eventually, and
yes, this is a huge undertaking (much larger than the audit container
ID work) that will need to be done in stages.

The first step is moving away from audit_log_format() to an in-kernel
audit API that separates the data from the record format; I've got a
lot of ideas on that, but as I said earlier, it's mostly on the back
burner so it doesn't hold up the audit container ID work.

-- 
paul moore
www.paul-moore.com