Re: [PATCH ghak90 V8 07/16] audit: add contid support for signalling the audit daemon

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Tue, Mar 24, 2020 at 5:02 PM Richard Guy Briggs <rgb@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 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.

Perhaps I'm remembering your latest spin of these patches incorrectly,
but there is still a big gap between when the record is generated and
when it is sent up to the audit daemon.  Most importantly in that gap
is the whole big queue/multicast/unicast mess.

You don't need to show me code, but I would like to see some sort of
plan for dealing with multiple nested audit daemons.  Basically I just
want to make sure we aren't painting ourselves into a corner with this
approach; and if for some horrible reason we are, I at least want us
to be aware of what we are getting ourselves into.

-- 
paul moore
www.paul-moore.com



[Index of Archives]     [Netfitler Users]     [Berkeley Packet Filter]     [LARTC]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite Forum]

  Powered by Linux