From: Paul Moore <paul@paul-moore.com>
To: Steve Grubb <sgrubb@redhat.com>
Cc: rgb@redhat.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.ibm.com>,
Lakshmi Ramasubramanian <nramas@linux.microsoft.com>,
linux-audit@redhat.com, linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] integrity: Add errno field in audit message
Date: Mon, 15 Jun 2020 18:58:13 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAHC9VhT6JSLBD-JMfQbn9eUsUg=juznRz41DTOaia-=WhrAAuA@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <8800031.dr63W5FlUW@x2>
On Mon, Jun 15, 2020 at 6:23 PM Steve Grubb <sgrubb@redhat.com> wrote:
> On Friday, June 12, 2020 3:50:14 PM EDT Lakshmi Ramasubramanian wrote:
> > On 6/12/20 12:25 PM, Mimi Zohar wrote:
> > > The idea is a good idea, but you're assuming that "result" is always
> > > errno. That was probably true originally, but isn't now. For
> > > example, ima_appraise_measurement() calls xattr_verify(), which
> > > compares the security.ima hash with the calculated file hash. On
> > > failure, it returns the result of memcmp(). Each and every code path
> > > will need to be checked.
> >
> > Good catch Mimi.
> >
> > Instead of "errno" should we just use "result" and log the value given
> > in the result parameter?
>
> That would likely collide with another field of the same name which is the
> operation's results. If it really is errno, the name is fine. It's generic
> enough that it can be reused on other events if that mattered.
Steve, what is the historical reason why we have both "res" and
"result" for indicating a boolean success/fail? I'm just curious how
we ended up this way, and who may still be using "result".
--
paul moore
www.paul-moore.com
--
Linux-audit mailing list
Linux-audit@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-audit
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-06-15 22:58 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-06-11 0:03 [PATCH 1/2] integrity: Add errno field in audit message Lakshmi Ramasubramanian
2020-06-11 0:04 ` [PATCH 2/2] IMA: Add audit log for failure conditions Lakshmi Ramasubramanian
2020-06-12 20:23 ` Mimi Zohar
2020-06-11 1:45 ` [PATCH 1/2] integrity: Add errno field in audit message Paul Moore
2020-06-11 1:58 ` Lakshmi Ramasubramanian
2020-06-11 2:19 ` Paul Moore
2020-06-12 19:25 ` Mimi Zohar
2020-06-12 19:50 ` Lakshmi Ramasubramanian
2020-06-15 22:23 ` Steve Grubb
2020-06-15 22:58 ` Paul Moore [this message]
2020-06-16 15:29 ` Steve Grubb
2020-06-16 15:43 ` Lakshmi Ramasubramanian
2020-06-16 15:55 ` Steve Grubb
2020-06-16 19:53 ` Mimi Zohar
2020-06-16 20:28 ` Steve Grubb
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to='CAHC9VhT6JSLBD-JMfQbn9eUsUg=juznRz41DTOaia-=WhrAAuA@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=paul@paul-moore.com \
--cc=linux-audit@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=nramas@linux.microsoft.com \
--cc=rgb@redhat.com \
--cc=sgrubb@redhat.com \
--cc=zohar@linux.ibm.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).