On Mon, Feb 13, 2017 at 3:50 PM, Richard Guy Briggs <rgb@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 2017-02-13 12:57, Steve Grubb wrote: >> On Friday, February 10, 2017 5:54:45 PM EST Richard Guy Briggs wrote: >> > On 2017-02-10 17:39, Steve Grubb wrote: >> > > > The alternatives that I currently see are to drop packets for which >> > > > there is no local process ownership, or to leave the ownership fields >> > > > unset.> >> > >> > > What ownership fields are we talking about? >> > >> > The ones you want, auid, pid, ses. Perhaps I'm using the wrong >> > terminology. What technical term is there for the collection of subject >> > identifiers? >> >> Subject attributes. > > Ah ok, I'll try to remember to use that term... > > Now that you know what I'm talking about, can you go back and answer the > questions I had about packet "ownership" (which is really packet subject > attributes)? If we have that information, how to we include it in the > message format? And if we don't have it, do we ignore the packet, or do > we swing fields out, or do we set those fields to "unset" or do we use > an auxiliary record? Packet "ownership" is likely going to be impossible to determine reliably since in some cases you can't even match a packet to a socket, let alone a process. To back up a few messages in this thread, to Richard's list of things to potentially log: > helpful action, hook I haven't checked, but do we allow setting of an audit key in NETFILTER_PKT records? It seems like that might be a good thing for the userspace tools and would likely make logging the action/hook unncessary. > useless? len I don't see much point in this. > helpful inif, outif, mark Let's split this into two things: the interfaces and the mark. I don't see much value in logging the mark, but I could see some value in logging the interface. > useless? smac, dmac, macproto Probably useless in the majority of use cases. > helpful protocol family I think we need some clarity on protocol logging; we've got "macproto" (I assume this is the ethertype, or similar), "protocol family" (I assume this to be a duplicate of ethertype, e.g. AF_INET), and "proto" (see below, I assume this to be TCP/UDP/etc.). > useless? truncated Definitely useless. Only keep this if we need it for some backwards compatibility. > helpful saddr, daddr Helpful. > useless? ipid Useless. > helpful proto > helpful sport, dport Assuming "proto" means the TCP/UDP/etc. then we should treat the proto/ports as one block; you can't log the ports without logging "proto". > useless? frag > useless? truncated Yes, useless. > helpful icmptype, icmpcode Similar to proto/port above. > helpful secmark (I forgot to change it from "obj" to "secmark" in my patch). We may also want to log the peer label if we are going to log the secmark. -- paul moore www.paul-moore.com -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netfilter-devel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
