On Thursday, December 14, 2017 7:42:26 AM EST Paul Moore wrote:

> >> Looking at the kernel code, it looks like the actions_logged knob

> >> isn't really intended to filter/drop seccomp events,

> >

> > That's unfortunate. I thought this was a way to suppress generation of

> > events. We have a requirement that audit events be selective by the

> > administrator. We need a knob to drop some events. I guess, the only knob

> > right now is the exclude filter. That is probably too course.

> >

> >> but rather force seccomp events to be loggged. Look at seccomp_log() to

> >> see what I mean; there is still a call to audit_seccomp() at the end.

> >

> > Hmm. What do we do?

>

> I imagine we could put together a rather coarse grained action filter,

> similar to what we have with "actions_logged" (maybe

> "actions_silent"?), and perhaps add some additional audit filters for

> seccomp for those who happen to have audit enabled. Both should be

> relatively easy, the "actions_silent" field especially so.

OK. That would be helpful. This is eating up my log space. The biggest offenders seem to be doing trap kind of events. I suppose if an errno was returned the program would respond by erroring out. But since its a trap, I suspect something looks around at data and then OK's it to proceed on which results in another trap.

-Steve