2018-04-16 16:11 GMT+02:00 Richard Guy Briggs <rgb@xxxxxxxxxx>: > On 2018-04-16 09:26, Ondrej Mosnacek wrote: >> 2018-04-10 1:34 GMT+02:00 Richard Guy Briggs <rgb@xxxxxxxxxx>: >> > There were two formats of the audit MAC_STATUS record, one of which was more >> > standard than the other. One listed enforcing status changes and the >> > other listed enabled status changes with a non-standard label. In >> > addition, the record was missing information about which LSM was >> > responsible and the operation's completion status. While this record is >> > only issued on success, the parser expects the res= field to be present. >> > >> > old enforcing/permissive: >> > type=MAC_STATUS msg=audit(1523312831.378:24514): enforcing=0 old_enforcing=1 auid=0 ses=1 >> > old enable/disable: >> > type=MAC_STATUS msg=audit(1523312831.378:24514): selinux=0 auid=0 ses=1 >> > >> > List both sets of status and old values and add the lsm= field and the >> > res= field. >> > >> > Here is the new format: >> > type=MAC_STATUS msg=audit(1523293828.657:891): enforcing=0 old_enforcing=1 auid=0 ses=1 enabled=1 old-enabled=1 lsm=selinux res=1 >> > >> > This record already accompanied a SYSCALL record. >> > >> > See: https://github.com/linux-audit/audit-kernel/issues/46 >> > Signed-off-by: Richard Guy Briggs <rgb@xxxxxxxxxx> >> > --- >> > security/selinux/selinuxfs.c | 11 +++++++---- >> > 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) >> > >> > diff --git a/security/selinux/selinuxfs.c b/security/selinux/selinuxfs.c >> > index 00eed84..00b21b2 100644 >> > --- a/security/selinux/selinuxfs.c >> > +++ b/security/selinux/selinuxfs.c >> > @@ -145,10 +145,11 @@ static ssize_t sel_write_enforce(struct file *file, const char __user *buf, >> > if (length) >> > goto out; >> > audit_log(current->audit_context, GFP_KERNEL, AUDIT_MAC_STATUS, >> > - "enforcing=%d old_enforcing=%d auid=%u ses=%u", >> > + "enforcing=%d old_enforcing=%d auid=%u ses=%u" >> > + " enabled=%d old-enabled=%d lsm=selinux res=1", >> >> This is just a tiny nit but why does "old_enforcing" use an underscore >> and "old-enabled" a dash? Shouldn't the style be consistent across >> fields? > > Yes, but my understanding is a preference for underscore, and not to > change existing field names. Ah, I just noticed that the field is already used elsewhere in the code, so it makes sense to keep it the same. I thought at first that it is just a typo. > > Steve? > >> Just my two cents... > > These details are worth noticing, thank you. > >> > new_value, selinux_enforcing, >> > from_kuid(&init_user_ns, audit_get_loginuid(current)), >> > - audit_get_sessionid(current)); >> > + audit_get_sessionid(current), selinux_enabled, selinux_enabled); >> > selinux_enforcing = new_value; >> > if (selinux_enforcing) >> > avc_ss_reset(0); >> > @@ -272,9 +273,11 @@ static ssize_t sel_write_disable(struct file *file, const char __user *buf, >> > if (length) >> > goto out; >> > audit_log(current->audit_context, GFP_KERNEL, AUDIT_MAC_STATUS, >> > - "selinux=0 auid=%u ses=%u", >> > + "enforcing=%d old_enforcing=%d auid=%u ses=%u" >> > + " enabled=%d old-enabled=%d lsm=selinux res=1", >> > + selinux_enforcing, selinux_enforcing, >> >> ^ also here >> >> > from_kuid(&init_user_ns, audit_get_loginuid(current)), >> > - audit_get_sessionid(current)); >> > + audit_get_sessionid(current), 0, 1); >> > } >> > >> > length = count; >> >> Ondrej Mosnacek <omosnace at redhat dot com> > > - 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 -- Ondrej Mosnacek <omosnace at redhat dot com> Associate Software Engineer, Security Technologies Red Hat, Inc.
