On 2020-03-23 20:16, Paul Moore wrote: > On Thu, Mar 19, 2020 at 6:03 PM Richard Guy Briggs <rgb@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On 2020-03-18 18:06, Paul Moore wrote: > > ... > > > > I hope we can do better than string manipulations in the kernel. I'd > > > much rather defer generating the ACID list (if possible), than > > > generating a list only to keep copying and editing it as the record is > > > sent. > > > > At the moment we are stuck with a string-only format. > > Yes, we are. That is another topic, and another set of changes I've > been deferring so as to not disrupt the audit container ID work. > > I was thinking of what we do inside the kernel between when the record > triggering event happens and when we actually emit the record to > userspace. Perhaps we collect the ACID information while the event is > occurring, but we defer generating the record until later when we have > a better understanding of what should be included in the ACID list. > It is somewhat similar (but obviously different) to what we do for > PATH records (we collect the pathname info when the path is being > resolved). Ok, now I understand your concern. In the case of NETFILTER_PKT records, the CONTAINER_ID record is the only other possible record and they are generated at the same time with a local context. In the case of any event involving a syscall, that CONTAINER_ID record is generated at the time of the rest of the event record generation at syscall exit. The others are only generated when needed, such as the sig2 reply. We generally just store the contobj pointer until we actually generate the CONTAINER_ID (or CONTAINER_OP) record. > paul moore - 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
