On 2018-07-20 18:13, Paul Moore wrote: > On Wed, Jun 6, 2018 at 1:00 PM Richard Guy Briggs <rgb@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Create a new audit record AUDIT_CONTAINER to document the audit > > container identifier of a process if it is present. > > > > Called from audit_log_exit(), syscalls are covered. > > > > A sample raw event: > > type=SYSCALL msg=audit(1519924845.499:257): arch=c000003e syscall=257 success=yes exit=3 a0=ffffff9c a1=56374e1cef30 a2=241 a3=1b6 items=2 ppid=606 pid=635 auid=0 uid=0 gid=0 euid=0 suid=0 fsuid=0 egid=0 sgid=0 fsgid=0 tty=pts0 ses=3 comm="bash" exe="/usr/bin/bash" subj=unconfined_u:unconfined_r:unconfined_t:s0-s0:c0.c1023 key="tmpcontainerid" > > type=CWD msg=audit(1519924845.499:257): cwd="/root" > > type=PATH msg=audit(1519924845.499:257): item=0 name="/tmp/" inode=13863 dev=00:27 mode=041777 ouid=0 ogid=0 rdev=00:00 obj=system_u:object_r:tmp_t:s0 nametype= PARENT cap_fp=0000000000000000 cap_fi=0000000000000000 cap_fe=0 cap_fver=0 > > type=PATH msg=audit(1519924845.499:257): item=1 name="/tmp/tmpcontainerid" inode=17729 dev=00:27 mode=0100644 ouid=0 ogid=0 rdev=00:00 obj=unconfined_u:object_r:user_tmp_t:s0 nametype=CREATE cap_fp=0000000000000000 cap_fi=0000000000000000 cap_fe=0 cap_fver=0 > > type=PROCTITLE msg=audit(1519924845.499:257): proctitle=62617368002D6300736C65657020313B206563686F2074657374203E202F746D702F746D70636F6E7461696E65726964 > > type=CONTAINER msg=audit(1519924845.499:257): op=task contid=123458 > > > > See: https://github.com/linux-audit/audit-kernel/issues/90 > > See: https://github.com/linux-audit/audit-userspace/issues/51 > > See: https://github.com/linux-audit/audit-testsuite/issues/64 > > See: https://github.com/linux-audit/audit-kernel/wiki/RFE-Audit-Container-ID > > Signed-off-by: Richard Guy Briggs <rgb@xxxxxxxxxx> > > --- > > include/linux/audit.h | 7 +++++++ > > include/uapi/linux/audit.h | 1 + > > kernel/audit.c | 23 +++++++++++++++++++++++ > > kernel/auditsc.c | 3 +++ > > 4 files changed, 34 insertions(+) > > ... > > > --- a/include/uapi/linux/audit.h > > +++ b/include/uapi/linux/audit.h > > @@ -115,6 +115,7 @@ > > #define AUDIT_REPLACE 1329 /* Replace auditd if this packet unanswerd */ > > #define AUDIT_KERN_MODULE 1330 /* Kernel Module events */ > > #define AUDIT_FANOTIFY 1331 /* Fanotify access decision */ > > +#define AUDIT_CONTAINER 1332 /* Container ID */ > > I'm not sure I'm completely sold on the AUDIT_CONTAINER_ID and > AUDIT_CONTAINER record type names. From what I can tell > AUDIT_CONTAINER_ID seems to be used for audit container ID management > operations, e.g. setting the ID, whereas the AUDIT_CONTAINER is used > to tag events with the corresponding audit container ID. Assuming > that is correct, it seems like AUDIT_CONTAINER might be better served > if it was named AUDIT_CONTAINER_ID and if we could change > AUDIT_CONTAINER_ID to AUDIT_CONTAINER_OP/MGMT/etc. Thoughts? Please see discussion at: https://www.redhat.com/archives/linux-audit/2018-May/msg00101.html I'm fine with changing AUDIT_CONTAINER_ID to AUDIT_CONTAINER_OP/MGMT/etc. > > #define AUDIT_AVC 1400 /* SE Linux avc denial or grant */ > > #define AUDIT_SELINUX_ERR 1401 /* Internal SE Linux Errors */ > > diff --git a/kernel/audit.c b/kernel/audit.c > > index e7478cb..5e150c6 100644 > > --- a/kernel/audit.c > > +++ b/kernel/audit.c > > @@ -2048,6 +2048,29 @@ void audit_log_session_info(struct audit_buffer *ab) > > audit_log_format(ab, " auid=%u ses=%u", auid, sessionid); > > } > > > > +/* > > + * audit_log_contid - report container info > > + * @tsk: task to be recorded > > + * @context: task or local context for record > > + * @op: contid string description > > + */ > > +int audit_log_contid(struct task_struct *tsk, > > + struct audit_context *context, char *op) > > +{ > > + struct audit_buffer *ab; > > + > > + if (!audit_contid_set(tsk)) > > + return 0; > > + /* Generate AUDIT_CONTAINER record with container ID */ > > + ab = audit_log_start(context, GFP_KERNEL, AUDIT_CONTAINER); > > + if (!ab) > > + return -ENOMEM; > > + audit_log_format(ab, "op=%s contid=%llu", > > + op, audit_get_contid(tsk)); > > Can you explain your reason for including an "op" field in this record > type? I've been looking at the rest of the patches in this patchset > and it seems to be used more as an indicator of the record's > generating context rather than any sort of audit container ID > operation. "action" might work, but that's netfilter and numeric... "kind"? Nothing else really seems to fit from a field name, type or lack of searchability perspective. Steve, do you have an opinion? > > + audit_log_end(ab); > > + return 0; > > +} > > -- > paul moore > www.paul-moore.com - RGB -- Richard Guy Briggs <rgb@xxxxxxxxxx> Sr. S/W Engineer, Kernel Security, Base Operating Systems Remote, Ottawa, Red Hat Canada IRC: rgb, SunRaycer Voice: +1.647.777.2635, Internal: (81) 32635
