Messages in this thread |  | | From | Paul Moore <> | Date | Sat, 2 Apr 2022 11:07:57 -0400 | Subject | Re: [PATCH] audit: do a quick exit when syscall number is invalid |
| |
On Sat, Apr 2, 2022 at 4:06 AM CGEL <cgel.zte@gmail.com> wrote: > On Fri, Apr 01, 2022 at 10:16:45AM -0400, Paul Moore wrote: > > On Fri, Apr 1, 2022 at 9:39 AM Steve Grubb <sgrubb@redhat.com> wrote: > > > > > > On Thursday, March 31, 2022 9:57:05 PM EDT CGEL wrote: > > > > On Thu, Mar 31, 2022 at 10:16:23AM -0400, Paul Moore wrote: > > > > > On Wed, Mar 30, 2022 at 10:29 PM CGEL <cgel.zte@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > On Wed, Mar 30, 2022 at 10:48:12AM -0400, Paul Moore wrote: > > > > > > > If audit is not generating SYSCALL records, even for invalid/ENOSYS > > > > > > > syscalls, I would consider that a bug which should be fixed. > > > > > > > > > > > > If we fix this bug, do you think audit invalid/ENOSYS syscalls better > > > > > > be forcible or be a rule that can be configure? I think configure is > > > > > > better. > > > > > > > > > > It isn't clear to me exactly what you are asking, but I would expect > > > > > the existing audit syscall filtering mechanism to work regardless if > > > > > the syscall is valid or not. > > > > > > > > Thanks, I try to make it more clear. We found that auditctl would only > > > > set rule with syscall number (>=0 && <2047) ... > > > > That is exactly why I wrote the warning below in my response ... > > > I think the question is more clear now. > > 1) libaudit.c wants to forbid setting invalid syscall, but inconsistent > Currently way(>=0 && <2047) is inconsistent, syscall with number 2000 and > syscall with number 3000 are both invalid syscall. But 2000 can be set by > auditctl, and 3000 cannot be set by auditctl. > A better way to do this forbidden is to use __NR_syscalls(asm-generic/unistd.h). > > 2) if libaudit.c do the right forbidden, kernel better ignore invalid syscall > See this patch. > > If we want audit invalid syscall as you said before. libaudit.c should not > do the forbidden, auditctl should allow setting syscall rule with 'any' number. > So do you think we should fix libaudit.c?
I'm really not very clear on what you are proposing, but we can't change the kernel/userspace API in any way which would break compatibility with old/existing userspace tools.
-- paul-moore.com
|  |