Acked-by: Eric Paris <eparis@xxxxxxxxxx> On Wed, 2014-04-30 at 08:38 -0700, Stephen Smalley wrote: > Attached patch switches to reporting permissive=0|1 and only does it > for avc: denied messages. > > On Wed, Apr 30, 2014 at 8:18 AM, Stephen Smalley > <stephen.smalley@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > I could make it permissive=0 or permissive=1 if that is less > > confusing. It doesn't necessarily correspond to the result of the > > system call, just the avc_has_perm call, as e.g. the kernel checks > > CAP_DAC_OVERRIDE and falls back to CAP_DAC_READ_SEARCH if only > > read/search access was requested, and there are other cases where a > > permission denial has a side effect rather than preventing the system > > call (e.g. CAP_FSETID). > > > > On Wed, Apr 30, 2014 at 6:34 AM, Daniel J Walsh <dwalsh@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> > >> On 04/30/2014 09:29 AM, Steve Grubb wrote: > >>> On Wednesday, April 30, 2014 08:59:50 AM Daniel J Walsh wrote: > >>>> How about permitted rather then allowed. > >>> I think permitted is already in an AVC. > >> Not sure where. > >>> > >>>> On 04/29/2014 10:59 PM, Eric Paris wrote: > >>>>> On Tue, 2014-04-29 at 16:54 -0700, Stephen Smalley wrote: > >>>>>> Requested for Android in order to distinguish denials that are not in > >>>>>> fact breaking anything yet due to permissive domains versus denials > >>>>>> that are being enforced, but seems generally useful. result field was > >>>>>> already in the selinux audit data structure and was being passed to > >>>>>> avc_audit() but wasn't being used. Seems to cause no harm to ausearch > >>>>>> or audit2allow to add it as a field. Comments? > >>>>> I think it's a great idea, but I'm worried that Steve is going to get > >>>>> grumpy because an AVC record is going to have a result= field which is > >>>>> similar, but not necessarily related to the res= field of a SYSCALL > >>>>> record. > >>> I think that I'll have to parse this field no matter what. Its probably that > >>> important. In the syscall, we use success= to be the final determination. > >>> > >>> > >>>>> Seems easily confused (although probably 9999 times out of > >>>>> 10000 they will be the same) > >>> Why would this ever not be correct? Are there times when we get an AVC with a > >>> denial _and_ the syscall completes successfully? > >>> > >>> I'd suggest using res= since its in the audit dictionary and means exactly > >>> what you are wanting to use it for. In it, 1 is success, 0 is failure. > >>> > >> I have seen AVC's where the success=yes in enforcing mode. Basically > >> the kernel takes a different code path and the syscall succeeds. Most > >> of these end up as dontaudits. > >>>>> So while I wholeheartedly think we should take the idea, I wonder if > >>>>> someone can dream up a name that isn't confusingly similar... > >>>>> > >>>>> I can't think of anything... > >>> There is thesaurus.com. :-) > >>> > >>> consequence, outcome, effect, reaction, conclusion, verdict, decision, > >>> judgement, finding, ruling, answer, solution, recommendation, order, ... > >>> > >>> -Steve > >> _______________________________________________ Selinux mailing list Selinux@xxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe, send email to Selinux-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxx. To get help, send an email containing "help" to Selinux-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx.
