On 2019-04-01 10:50, Paul Moore wrote: > On Fri, Mar 15, 2019 at 2:35 PM Richard Guy Briggs <rgb@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Audit events could happen in a network namespace outside of a task > > context due to packets received from the net that trigger an auditing > > rule prior to being associated with a running task. The network > > namespace could be in use by multiple containers by association to the > > tasks in that network namespace. We still want a way to attribute > > these events to any potential containers. Keep a list per network > > namespace to track these audit container identifiiers. > > > > Add/increment the audit container identifier on: > > - initial setting of the audit container identifier via /proc > > - clone/fork call that inherits an audit container identifier > > - unshare call that inherits an audit container identifier > > - setns call that inherits an audit container identifier > > Delete/decrement the audit container identifier on: > > - an inherited audit container identifier dropped when child set > > - process exit > > - unshare call that drops a net namespace > > - setns call that drops a net namespace > > > > See: https://github.com/linux-audit/audit-kernel/issues/92 > > 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 | 19 ++++++++++++ > > kernel/audit.c | 86 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-- > > kernel/nsproxy.c | 4 +++ > > 3 files changed, 106 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > ... > > > diff --git a/kernel/audit.c b/kernel/audit.c > > index cf448599ef34..7fa3194f5342 100644 > > --- a/kernel/audit.c > > +++ b/kernel/audit.c > > @@ -72,6 +72,7 @@ > > #include <linux/freezer.h> > > #include <linux/pid_namespace.h> > > #include <net/netns/generic.h> > > +#include <net/net_namespace.h> > > > > #include "audit.h" > > > > @@ -99,9 +100,13 @@ > > /** > > * struct audit_net - audit private network namespace data > > * @sk: communication socket > > + * @contid_list: audit container identifier list > > + * @contid_list_lock audit container identifier list lock > > */ > > struct audit_net { > > struct sock *sk; > > + struct list_head contid_list; > > + spinlock_t contid_list_lock; > > }; > > > > /** > > @@ -275,8 +280,11 @@ struct audit_task_info init_struct_audit = { > > void audit_free(struct task_struct *tsk) > > { > > struct audit_task_info *info = tsk->audit; > > + struct nsproxy *ns = tsk->nsproxy; > > > > audit_free_syscall(tsk); > > + if (ns) > > + audit_netns_contid_del(ns->net_ns, audit_get_contid(tsk)); > > /* Freeing the audit_task_info struct must be performed after > > * audit_log_exit() due to need for loginuid and sessionid. > > */ > > @@ -376,6 +384,73 @@ static struct sock *audit_get_sk(const struct net *net) > > return aunet->sk; > > } > > > > +void audit_netns_contid_add(struct net *net, u64 contid) > > +{ > > + struct audit_net *aunet = net_generic(net, audit_net_id); > > + struct list_head *contid_list = &aunet->contid_list; > > + struct audit_contid *cont; > > + > > + if (!audit_contid_valid(contid)) > > + return; > > + if (!aunet) > > + return; > > We should move the contid_list assignment below this check, or decide > that aunet is always going to valid (?) and get rid of this check > completely. Yes, we should move the contid_list assignment below the aunet check. At this point, testing has revlealed that audit_netns_contid_del() is being called very infrequently (very early) with invalid net or aunet which is why its code has been re-arranged to safeguard against it. So far, audit_netns_contid_add() has not had this problem, but I'd feel safer leaving the check in and to make that check relevant (rather than the contid_list assignment panicing) I'll move that assignment. > > + spin_lock(&aunet->contid_list_lock); > > + if (!list_empty(contid_list)) > > We don't need the list_empty() check here do we? I think we can just > call list_for_each_entry_rcu(), yes? Yes, you appear to be correct. The examples in auditfilter.c and auditsc.c are stale since the original optimizations they were protecting are no longer present, but the practice was copied by several maintainers since. I'll fix this and address the others seperately. > > + list_for_each_entry_rcu(cont, contid_list, list) > > + if (cont->id == contid) { > > + refcount_inc(&cont->refcount); > > + goto out; > > + } > > + cont = kmalloc(sizeof(struct audit_contid), GFP_ATOMIC); > > If you had to guess, what do you think is going to be more common: > bumping the refcount of an existing entry in the list, or adding a new > entry? I'm asking because I always get a little nervous when doing > allocations while holding a spinlock. Yes, you are doing it with > GFP_ATOMIC, but it still seems like something to try and avoid if this > is going to approach 50%. However, if the new entry is rare then the > extra work of always doing the allocation before taking the lock and > then freeing it afterwards might be a bad tradeoff. > > My gut feeling says we might do about as many allocations as refcount > bumps, but I could be thinking about this wrong. I'm sure we could find extreme use cases in both directions. One extreme is one task per container. The other extreme is a distro container where all processes for an entire O/S running in a container just use the refcount. The former seems more likely at this point. We break even at two tasks per container. I'm willing to switch this over to alloc/dealloc and use GFP_KERNEL which will inevitably make some kernel maintainers happier and others cringe. This could be a good candidate for kmem_cache since it is a fixed size. > Moving the allocation outside the spinlock might also open the door to > doing this as GFP_KERNEL, which is a good thing, but I haven't looked > at the callers to see if that is possible (it may not be). That's an > exercise left to the patch author (if he hasn't done that already). Switching to GFP_KERNEL is certainly preferable. None of the callers will have a problem with that. > > + if (cont) { > > + INIT_LIST_HEAD(&cont->list); > > Unless there is some guidance that INIT_LIST_HEAD() should be used > regardless, you shouldn't need to call this here since list_add_rcu() > will take care of any list.h related initialization. I see enough examples without that suggest it isn't necessary. I'll remove it. > > + cont->id = contid; > > + refcount_set(&cont->refcount, 1); > > + list_add_rcu(&cont->list, contid_list); > > + } > > +out: > > + spin_unlock(&aunet->contid_list_lock); > > +} > > 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
