On Thursday, May 14, 2015 11:23:09 PM Andy Lutomirski wrote: > On Thu, May 14, 2015 at 7:32 PM, Richard Guy Briggs <rgb@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On 15/05/14, Paul Moore wrote: > >> * Look at our existing audit records to determine which records should > >> have > >> namespace and container ID tokens added. We may only want to add the > >> additional fields in the case where the namespace/container ID tokens are > >> not the init namespace. > > > > If we have a record that ties a set of namespace IDs with a container > > ID, then I expect we only need to list the containerID along with auid > > and sessionID. > > The problem here is that the kernel has no concept of a "container", and I > don't think it makes any sense to add one just for audit. "Container" is a > marketing term used by some userspace tools. No, its a real thing just like a login. Does the kernel have any concept of a login? Yet it happens. And it causes us to generate events describing who, where from, role, success, and time of day. :-) > I can imagine that both audit could benefit from a concept of a > namespace *path* that understands nesting (e.g. root/2/5/1 or > something along those lines). Mapping these to "containers" belongs > in userspace, I think. I don't doubt that just as user space sequences the actions that are a login. I just need the kernel to do some book keeping and associate the necessary attributes in the event record to be able to reconstruct what is actually happening. -Steve _______________________________________________ Containers mailing list Containers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers
