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

Re: [PATCH] LSPP audit enablement: storing selinux ocontext and scontext

On Mon, 2005-08-29 at 17:57 -0400, Steve Grubb wrote:
> On Monday 29 August 2005 17:18, Dustin Kirkland wrote:
> > Hmmm...  Steve: Can you point me to some places where you feel this
> > might be necessary?
> Any function that hooks the main part of the kernel and does auditing. For 
> example, audit_ipc_security_context. There's more...

Ok, I'll look around.

> >One thing that's important to realize is that audit_panic() does not
> >necessarily panic the kernel.  Depending on the value of audit_failure,
> >it can 1) fail silently, 2) fail with only a KERN_ERR printk, or 3) it
> >can panic the kernel.
> Which is inadequate - failing the syscall might also be appropriate and its 
> not an option in the 3 you mentioned. In the case of printk & ignore...the 
> syscall passes.

Ok, then anyone who disagrees with failing the syscall speak up now...
If this is the preferred operation, please say so.  Klaus--I, too, am
calling for your input.

> > I'd like to push this for inclusion in David's tree as soon as possible.
> I need to wait until I'm caught up to really review this patch. 
> I still think its too early for LSPP discussion since we haven't set out the requirements 
> for what we are going to do in this round of development. Its likely to be 
> next week before I can look at this closely. 

Ok, well I'm hoping to show some progress here on my side.  I've been in
a holding pattern for a month since I originally sent this before OLS.

> I still think it calls audit_panic too easy. How does SE Linux AVC messages 
> get handled when it fails looking up something? Does it call audit_panic or 
> try to output the number? I think they should both match.

/me defers to Stephen's response...

> BTW, does audit_set_macxattr need to NULL check after kstrdup?

I've looked at about a dozen calls to kstrdup() around the kernel, most
of which do not perform a NULL check, though some do.  David offered the
suggestion of using kstrdup(), perhaps he has a recommendation?


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

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