From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.9 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EF549C35247 for ; Tue, 4 Feb 2020 18:12:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C6DD82082E for ; Tue, 4 Feb 2020 18:12:27 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b="Ff+T2yYc" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727466AbgBDSM0 (ORCPT ); Tue, 4 Feb 2020 13:12:26 -0500 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-1.mimecast.com ([207.211.31.120]:49503 "EHLO us-smtp-1.mimecast.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1727361AbgBDSMW (ORCPT ); Tue, 4 Feb 2020 13:12:22 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1580839941; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=Bzg9bDZQ96CGaLiNh7lVZC6J4F7OP3CKfbn8hB4NuvU=; b=Ff+T2yYcEYLooq5WKsUxhMua2yWhvki8kryi3e1zL0bRD6mbMPD5vvQ0UUG8JBRBmaiiuP xpxx1LfcPSXtATlkkgft6olZAKeAlNZ3ewJ+wSR0MYDEM0PlJxo6C6cQWiuqokCzymcMM5 Ja78S79NKQH4WBSXfWoOdwIgGqOP050= Received: from mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (mimecast-mx01.redhat.com [209.132.183.4]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-261-E-q9i6prMwOivKPvmq3UPw-1; Tue, 04 Feb 2020 13:12:17 -0500 X-MC-Unique: E-q9i6prMwOivKPvmq3UPw-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx08.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.23]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0B46818A6EC1; Tue, 4 Feb 2020 18:12:15 +0000 (UTC) Received: from x2.localnet (ovpn-116-11.phx2.redhat.com [10.3.116.11]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9117C19C69; Tue, 4 Feb 2020 18:12:03 +0000 (UTC) From: Steve Grubb To: Paul Moore Cc: Richard Guy Briggs , containers@lists.linux-foundation.org, linux-api@vger.kernel.org, Linux-Audit Mailing List , linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, LKML , netdev@vger.kernel.org, netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org, omosnace@redhat.com, dhowells@redhat.com, simo@redhat.com, Eric Paris , Serge Hallyn , ebiederm@xmission.com, nhorman@tuxdriver.com, Dan Walsh , mpatel@redhat.com Subject: Re: [PATCH ghak90 V8 13/16] audit: track container nesting Date: Tue, 04 Feb 2020 13:12:02 -0500 Message-ID: <35934535.C1y6eIYgqz@x2> Organization: Red Hat In-Reply-To: References: <3665686.i1MIc9PeWa@x2> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.84 on 10.5.11.23 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tuesday, February 4, 2020 10:52:36 AM EST Paul Moore wrote: > On Tue, Feb 4, 2020 at 10:47 AM Steve Grubb wrote: > > On Tuesday, February 4, 2020 8:19:44 AM EST Richard Guy Briggs wrote: > > > > The established pattern is that we print -1 when its unset and "?" > > > > when > > > > its totalling missing. So, how could this be invalid? It should be > > > > set > > > > or not. That is unless its totally missing just like when we do not > > > > run > > > > with selinux enabled and a context just doesn't exist. > > > > > > Ok, so in this case it is clearly unset, so should be -1, which will be > > > a > > > 20-digit number when represented as an unsigned long long int. > > > > > > Thank you for that clarification Steve. > > > > It is literally a -1. ( 2 characters) > > Well, not as Richard has currently written the code, it is a "%llu". > This was why I asked the question I did; if we want the "-1" here we > probably want to special case that as I don't think we want to display > audit container IDs as signed numbers in general. OK, then go with the long number, we'll fix it in the interpretation. I guess we do the same thing for auid. -Steve