Re: [PATCH] audit: add task history record

From: Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp>
To: Paul Moore <paul@paul-moore.com>
Cc: audit@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-security-module <linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org>,
	linux-audit@redhat.com,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] audit: add task history record
Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2023 19:29:52 +0900	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <6957af54-16a2-4c28-56ff-dafe95f4e276@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAHC9VhSz=3utr_CigGvkMEb6_avJUQq1Ak2smB7neSd76mzjFw@mail.gmail.com>

On 2023/08/16 22:53, Paul Moore wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 16, 2023 at 6:10 AM Tetsuo Handa
> <penguin-kernel@i-love.sakura.ne.jp> wrote:
>> On 2023/08/16 3:44, Paul Moore wrote:
>>> On Fri, Aug 11, 2023 at 6:58 AM Tetsuo Handa
>>> <penguin-kernel@i-love.sakura.ne.jp> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> When an unexpected system event occurs, the administrator may want to
>>>> identify which application triggered the event. For example, unexpected
>>>> process termination is still a real concern enough to write articles
>>>> like https://access.redhat.com/solutions/165993 .
>>>>
>>>> This patch adds a record which emits TOMOYO-like task history information
>>>> into the audit logs for better understanding of unexpected system events.
>>>>
>>>>   type=UNKNOWN[1340] msg=audit(1691750738.271:108): history="name=swapper/0;pid=1;start=20230811194329=>name=init;pid=1;start=20230811194343=>name=systemd;pid=1;start=20230811194439=>name=sshd;pid=3660;start=20230811104504=>name=sshd;pid=3767;start=20230811104535"
>>>
>>> While I respect your persistence, we've talked about this quite a bit
>>> already in other threads.  What you are trying to do is already
>>> possible with audit
>>
>> How?
> 
> If you configure audit to record exec() and friends you should have a
> proper history of the processes started on the system.

That is a "No LSM modules other than SELinux is needed because SELinux can do
everything" assertion. People propose different approaches/implementations because
they can't afford utilizing/configuring existing approaches/implementations.

Your assertion is a fatal problem for merging "Re: [PATCH v13 00/11] LSM: Three basic syscalls"
at https://lkml.kernel.org/r/CAHC9VhQ4ttkSLTBCrXNZSBR1FP9UZ_gUHmo0BS37LCdyBmUeyA@mail.gmail.com .

Please please allow LSM modules like https://lkml.kernel.org/r/41d03271-ff8a-9888-11de-a7f53da47328@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp
to obtain a stable LSM ID if you don't want to support something that possibly have an alternative.

--
Linux-audit mailing list
Linux-audit@redhat.com
https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-audit