Re: F36 Change proposal: No ifcfg by default (Self-Contained Change)

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Hello,

On Thursday, January 6, 2022 5:20:04 PM EST Demi Marie Obenour wrote:
> > It would be better if there was a systemctl solution. Any solution I
> > implement will be met with you need to migrate to systemctl. There have
> > been multiple bz opened and closed on this.
> 
> What would you need in order to be able to migrate to systemctl?

That's a good question and parallels Simo's question. I did not answer this 
right away to think about it.

> Could the dbus daemon or systemd generate the necessary audit records?

I don't think so. The trust boundary is the kernel. It creates all audit 
records and in the case where the event originates in user space, it adds a 
preamble that identifies who sent that event. The audit daemon is really a 
fancy syslog. It only generates a startup, stopped logging, resumed logging, 
and shutdown events.  The last two are communicated via signals. Signals was 
chosen because they are the most basic of communication methods and have 
consequences for the receiving program. All daemons have to handle signals.

> Or could auditctl handle everything itself, perhaps by talking to auditd
> over a socket instead of sending a signal?

To use a socket or dbus means more attack surface. But assuming this was 
acceptable, we could identify who is at the other end in the socket scenario. 
This is because the kernel can see both ends of the socket and can answer 
with authority. With dbus, I don't know how trustworthy it's identification of 
remote processes are. (Can answers be spoofed by a malicious app?) At one 
point, a kernel dbus was being proposed. It would have allowed authoritative 
answers to who I'm talking to because the answer came from the kernel.

Still thinking about it. But signals have to be handled no matter what. And 
since they have to be, they seem like the natural solution.

Cheers,
-Steve

_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure




[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Announce]     [Fedora Users]     [Fedora Kernel]     [Fedora Testing]     [Fedora Formulas]     [Fedora PHP Devel]     [Kernel Development]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Maintainers]     [Fedora Desktop]     [PAM]     [Red Hat Development]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]

  Powered by Linux