Re: [RFC PATCH ghak90 (was ghak32) V3 05/10] audit: add containerid support for tty_audit

[Paul Moore <paul@paul-moore.com>]

On Tue, Jul 24, 2018 at 10:10 AM Richard Guy Briggs <rgb@redhat.com> wrote:
> On 2018-07-20 18:14, Paul Moore wrote:
> > On Wed, Jun 6, 2018 at 1:04 PM Richard Guy Briggs <rgb@redhat.com> wrote:
> > > Add audit container identifier auxiliary record to tty logging rule
> > > event standalone records.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Richard Guy Briggs <rgb@redhat.com>
> > > ---
> > >  drivers/tty/tty_audit.c | 5 ++++-
> > >  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/drivers/tty/tty_audit.c b/drivers/tty/tty_audit.c
> > > index e30aa6b..66bd850 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/tty/tty_audit.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/tty/tty_audit.c
> > > @@ -66,8 +66,9 @@ static void tty_audit_log(const char *description, dev_t dev,
> > >         uid_t uid = from_kuid(&init_user_ns, task_uid(tsk));
> > >         uid_t loginuid = from_kuid(&init_user_ns, audit_get_loginuid(tsk));
> > >         unsigned int sessionid = audit_get_sessionid(tsk);
> > > +       struct audit_context *context = audit_alloc_local();
> >
> > We should be using current's audit_context in tty_audit_log().
> > Actually, we should probably just get rid of the tsk variable in
> > tty_audit_log() and use current directly to make things a bit more
> > obvious.
>
> Ok, agreed.  At this point, it it current passed in anyways so no harm
> other than efficiency.
>
> > <time passes>
> >
> > I did some digging and I have a two year old, half-baked patch that
> > cleans up this tsk/current usage as well as a few others.  I just
> > rebased it against audit/next and surprisingly it seems to pass a
> > basic smoke test (kernel boots and audit-testsuite passes); I'll post
> > it to the list as a RFC once I'm done reviewing these patches.
>
> I'll leave this patch the way it is since there should be no difference
> and trust this other patch will work its way through the system and
> solve that.

Yep, that's a merge issue I'll deal with when we get to that point.
Although, I would expect that when you post an updated patchset that
it applies cleanly to the then-current audit/next tree (or Linus'
tree, but audit/next is preferable).  In other words, please rebase
your development branch before doing your final dev testing and
posting.

> > > -       ab = audit_log_start(NULL, GFP_KERNEL, AUDIT_TTY);
> > > +       ab = audit_log_start(context, GFP_KERNEL, AUDIT_TTY);
> > >         if (ab) {
> > >                 char name[sizeof(tsk->comm)];
> > >
> > > @@ -80,6 +81,8 @@ static void tty_audit_log(const char *description, dev_t dev,
> > >                 audit_log_n_hex(ab, data, size);
> > >                 audit_log_end(ab);
> > >         }
> > > +       audit_log_contid(context, "tty", audit_get_contid(tsk));
> > > +       audit_free_context(context);
> > >  }
> >
> > --
> > paul moore
> > www.paul-moore.com
>
> - RGB
>
> --
> Richard Guy Briggs <rgb@redhat.com>
> Sr. S/W Engineer, Kernel Security, Base Operating Systems
> Remote, Ottawa, Red Hat Canada
> IRC: rgb, SunRaycer
> Voice: +1.647.777.2635, Internal: (81) 32635

-- 
paul moore
www.paul-moore.com