Running multiple audit service clients
by Max Timchenko
Dear all,
I have a situation where there are two audit clients on the same machine:
one of them is auditd, and another one is an IDS client that uses the audit
subsystem directly. By looking at the source (
http://lxr.free-electrons.com/source/kernel/audit.c?v=3.13#L787), I suspect
that there might be no provision in the kernel for multiple audit subsystem
userland daemons running in parallel (only one pid, only one netlink socket
in the kernel). I could not find any documentation confirming or denying
that.
Has anyone tried that before? What would actually happen if two different
audit clients tried to use the same interface to the audit subsystem in the
kernel?
Yours,
--
Max
10 years
Audit log Fields
by Sowndarya K
As of now there are so many proposed fields in the audit event log , if I
wanted to one proposed field which is of not use as much ,which one can I
chose for ?
10 years
[PATCH] audit: Fix typo in comment
by Wei Yuan
Signed-off-by: Weiyuan <weiyuan.wei(a)huawei.com>
---
kernel/audit_watch.c | 2 +-
kernel/auditfilter.c | 6 +++---
2 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/audit_watch.c b/kernel/audit_watch.c
index 9f194aa..3cf1c59 100644
--- a/kernel/audit_watch.c
+++ b/kernel/audit_watch.c
@@ -185,7 +185,7 @@ static struct audit_watch *audit_init_watch(char *path)
return watch;
}
-/* Translate a watch string to kernel respresentation. */
+/* Translate a watch string to kernel representation. */
int audit_to_watch(struct audit_krule *krule, char *path, int len, u32 op)
{
struct audit_watch *watch;
diff --git a/kernel/auditfilter.c b/kernel/auditfilter.c
index b8ff9e1..94ca7b1 100644
--- a/kernel/auditfilter.c
+++ b/kernel/auditfilter.c
@@ -158,7 +158,7 @@ char *audit_unpack_string(void **bufp, size_t *remain, size_t len)
return str;
}
-/* Translate an inode field to kernel respresentation. */
+/* Translate an inode field to kernel representation. */
static inline int audit_to_inode(struct audit_krule *krule,
struct audit_field *f)
{
@@ -415,7 +415,7 @@ static int audit_field_valid(struct audit_entry *entry, struct audit_field *f)
return 0;
}
-/* Translate struct audit_rule_data to kernel's rule respresentation. */
+/* Translate struct audit_rule_data to kernel's rule representation. */
static struct audit_entry *audit_data_to_entry(struct audit_rule_data *data,
size_t datasz)
{
@@ -593,7 +593,7 @@ static inline size_t audit_pack_string(void **bufp, const char *str)
return len;
}
-/* Translate kernel rule respresentation to struct audit_rule_data. */
+/* Translate kernel rule representation to struct audit_rule_data. */
static struct audit_rule_data *audit_krule_to_data(struct audit_krule *krule)
{
struct audit_rule_data *data;
--
2.1.0
10 years
Re: Linux-audit Digest, Vol 137, Issue 3
by Sowndarya K
How do *I* can get the complete code change of the following patch set
https://www.redhat.com/archives/linux-audit/2013-October/msg00048.html ?
On Thu, Feb 4, 2016 at 10:30 PM, <linux-audit-request(a)redhat.com> wrote:
> Send Linux-audit mailing list submissions to
> linux-audit(a)redhat.com
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-audit
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> linux-audit-request(a)redhat.com
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> linux-audit-owner(a)redhat.com
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of Linux-audit digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
> 1. Re: Regarding Auditd fails to start (Richard Guy Briggs)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Thu, 4 Feb 2016 05:15:57 -0500
> From: Richard Guy Briggs <rgb(a)redhat.com>
> To: Sowndarya K <sowndaryak18(a)gmail.com>
> Cc: linux-audit(a)redhat.com
> Subject: Re: Regarding Auditd fails to start
> Message-ID: <20160204101557.GD27528(a)madcap2.tricolour.ca>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>
> On 16/02/04, Sowndarya K wrote:
> > Thanks for your valuable response Richard!!
>
> Better late than never! (Re-adding the mailing list for openness and
> information sharing.)
>
> > Now what I am facing as a problem is when I run auditd inside two
> different
> > containers,the recent one which has started the auditd service is logging
> > all the processes which are created in other containers as well.How do I
> > take care of it in such a way that container specific process records
> > should be logged at each respective containers .
>
> This should not be possible for the definition of container that
> immediately comes to mind with any existing kernel I know of. How do
> you define a container? In particular from my point of interest, which
> namespaces are cloned? It should not be possible if the user or pid
> namespace has been cloned since the kernel explicitly blocks these for
> the time being. I suspect neither one has been cloned and you are
> seeing symptoms of RHBZ #1253123 which allows more than one auditd to
> exist in the initial namespaces. This has been addressed in Paul
> Moore's upstream kernel audit git tree as 133e1e5 to prevent this from
> happenning unless you have also run into RHBZ #1243308 that was a
> netlink rhashtable issue which should already be fixed in upstream
> kernels.
>
> > On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 9:31 PM, Richard Guy Briggs <rgb(a)redhat.com>
> wrote:
> > > On 16/02/03, Paul Moore wrote:
> > > > On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 9:08 AM, Steve Grubb <sgrubb(a)redhat.com>
> wrote:
> > > > > On Wed, 3 Feb 2016 07:57:52 -0500
> > > > > Paul Moore <paul(a)paul-moore.com> wrote:
> > > > >> On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 6:16 AM, Steve Grubb <sgrubb(a)redhat.com>
> wrote:
> > > > >> > On Wed, 3 Feb 2016 15:34:09 +0530
> > > > >> > Sowndarya K <sowndaryak18(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > >> >> I am running docker container without privileges and now
> service
> > > > >> >> auditd start fails to execute even I add capabilities to
> docker.
> > > > >> >> please try to help me as early as possible
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> > If auditd is being run inside a container, then it has problems
> > > > >> > because the audit subsystem inside the kernel isn't container
> > > > >> > aware/namespaced. I have recently made changes to auditd in svn
> for
> > > > >> > the next release which allows auditd to run as a log
> _aggregator_
> > > > >> > inside a container. This means it has no knowledge of events
> coming
> > > > >> > from within the container but can act as an aggregator for
> systems
> > > > >> > doing remote logging.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> To add some commentary to this: we are not going to namespace the
> > > > >> audit subsystem like other subsystems, but making audit *aware* of
> > > > >> namespaces is on the todo list.
> > > > >
> > > > > OK. Suppose I go out and rent a virtualized server with root
> access for
> > > > > my web site. Turns out the company that is leasing me time used
> > > > > containers as their method of virtualizing. my web site runs fine
> in a
> > > > > container so no big deal. However, as a customer, I would want
> access
> > > > > to the logs for my container directly in the container. As a
> matter of
> > > > > fact, its a PCI-DSS requirement to have access to those logs.
> > > > >
> > > > > I really think the audit system _has to be_ namespaced, somehow,
> for
> > > > > compliance reasons.
> > > >
> > > > Having access to audit events generated inside a namespace (or set of
> > > > namespaces to be more specific), and only generated inside a
> namespace
> > > > (or set of ...), does not require the audit subsystem to be
> > > > namespaced; however, it does require the audit subsystem to recognize
> > > > namespaces and associate them with events so that they can be tagged
> > > > and routed accordingly. Based on previous conversations, I suspect
> we
> > > > have the same goals/ideas and are just using different terminology.
> I
> > > > wouldn't worry too much about it at this point as that work is still
> > > > in the early stages.
> > >
> > > I'm late in the conversation, but "what Steve and Paul said". A number
> > > of discussions have already happenned concerning this idea and the goal
> > > is to have auditd be able to run pretty much seamlessly inside a
> > > container without influencing or compromising the auditd running in the
> > > parent namespace(s). From what we have discussed, it appears most
> > > likely that auditd will be anchored one per user namespace.
> > >
> > > > paul moore
> > >
> > > - RGB
>
> - RGB
>
> --
> Richard Guy Briggs <rbriggs(a)redhat.com>
> Senior Software Engineer, Kernel Security, AMER ENG Base Operating
> Systems, Red Hat
> Remote, Ottawa, Canada
> Voice: +1.647.777.2635, Internal: (81) 32635, Alt: +1.613.693.0684x3545
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> --
> Linux-audit mailing list
> Linux-audit(a)redhat.com
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-audit
>
> End of Linux-audit Digest, Vol 137, Issue 3
> *******************************************
>
10 years
Re: Regarding Auditd fails to start
by Richard Guy Briggs
On 16/02/04, Sowndarya K wrote:
> Thanks for your valuable response Richard!!
Better late than never! (Re-adding the mailing list for openness and
information sharing.)
> Now what I am facing as a problem is when I run auditd inside two different
> containers,the recent one which has started the auditd service is logging
> all the processes which are created in other containers as well.How do I
> take care of it in such a way that container specific process records
> should be logged at each respective containers .
This should not be possible for the definition of container that
immediately comes to mind with any existing kernel I know of. How do
you define a container? In particular from my point of interest, which
namespaces are cloned? It should not be possible if the user or pid
namespace has been cloned since the kernel explicitly blocks these for
the time being. I suspect neither one has been cloned and you are
seeing symptoms of RHBZ #1253123 which allows more than one auditd to
exist in the initial namespaces. This has been addressed in Paul
Moore's upstream kernel audit git tree as 133e1e5 to prevent this from
happenning unless you have also run into RHBZ #1243308 that was a
netlink rhashtable issue which should already be fixed in upstream
kernels.
> On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 9:31 PM, Richard Guy Briggs <rgb(a)redhat.com> wrote:
> > On 16/02/03, Paul Moore wrote:
> > > On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 9:08 AM, Steve Grubb <sgrubb(a)redhat.com> wrote:
> > > > On Wed, 3 Feb 2016 07:57:52 -0500
> > > > Paul Moore <paul(a)paul-moore.com> wrote:
> > > >> On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 6:16 AM, Steve Grubb <sgrubb(a)redhat.com> wrote:
> > > >> > On Wed, 3 Feb 2016 15:34:09 +0530
> > > >> > Sowndarya K <sowndaryak18(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >> >> I am running docker container without privileges and now service
> > > >> >> auditd start fails to execute even I add capabilities to docker.
> > > >> >> please try to help me as early as possible
> > > >> >
> > > >> > If auditd is being run inside a container, then it has problems
> > > >> > because the audit subsystem inside the kernel isn't container
> > > >> > aware/namespaced. I have recently made changes to auditd in svn for
> > > >> > the next release which allows auditd to run as a log _aggregator_
> > > >> > inside a container. This means it has no knowledge of events coming
> > > >> > from within the container but can act as an aggregator for systems
> > > >> > doing remote logging.
> > > >>
> > > >> To add some commentary to this: we are not going to namespace the
> > > >> audit subsystem like other subsystems, but making audit *aware* of
> > > >> namespaces is on the todo list.
> > > >
> > > > OK. Suppose I go out and rent a virtualized server with root access for
> > > > my web site. Turns out the company that is leasing me time used
> > > > containers as their method of virtualizing. my web site runs fine in a
> > > > container so no big deal. However, as a customer, I would want access
> > > > to the logs for my container directly in the container. As a matter of
> > > > fact, its a PCI-DSS requirement to have access to those logs.
> > > >
> > > > I really think the audit system _has to be_ namespaced, somehow, for
> > > > compliance reasons.
> > >
> > > Having access to audit events generated inside a namespace (or set of
> > > namespaces to be more specific), and only generated inside a namespace
> > > (or set of ...), does not require the audit subsystem to be
> > > namespaced; however, it does require the audit subsystem to recognize
> > > namespaces and associate them with events so that they can be tagged
> > > and routed accordingly. Based on previous conversations, I suspect we
> > > have the same goals/ideas and are just using different terminology. I
> > > wouldn't worry too much about it at this point as that work is still
> > > in the early stages.
> >
> > I'm late in the conversation, but "what Steve and Paul said". A number
> > of discussions have already happenned concerning this idea and the goal
> > is to have auditd be able to run pretty much seamlessly inside a
> > container without influencing or compromising the auditd running in the
> > parent namespace(s). From what we have discussed, it appears most
> > likely that auditd will be anchored one per user namespace.
> >
> > > paul moore
> >
> > - RGB
- RGB
--
Richard Guy Briggs <rbriggs(a)redhat.com>
Senior Software Engineer, Kernel Security, AMER ENG Base Operating Systems, Red Hat
Remote, Ottawa, Canada
Voice: +1.647.777.2635, Internal: (81) 32635, Alt: +1.613.693.0684x3545
10 years, 1 month
Regarding Auditd fails to start
by Sowndarya K
Hello,
I am running docker container without privileges and now service auditd
start fails to execute even i add capabilities to docker. please try to
help me as early as possible
Thanks
Sowndarya K
10 years, 1 month
audit 1.7.18 and auparse_feed_has_data
by Lev Stipakov
Hi,
I have a Debian 7.9 which includes libaudit-devel-1.7.18. That version
does not have auparse_feed_has_data(). Its implementation looks simple,
however it uses au_lo, which is declared as static in auparse.c and
therefore cannot be accessed outside of that file.
I took auparse_feed_has_data() usage from audisp-example.c
tv.tv_sec = 5;
tv.tv_usec = 0;
FD_ZERO(&read_mask);
FD_SET(0, &read_mask);
if (auparse_feed_has_data(au))
retval= select(1, &read_mask, NULL, NULL, &tv);
else
retval= select(1, &read_mask, NULL, NULL, NULL);
I noticed that old version of example plugin doesn't have
auparse_feed_has_data() or select() calls
(https://github.com/gdestuynder/audit-cef/blob/master/contrib/plugin/audis...)
What is the purpose of select/auparse_feed_has_data? Is it some kind of
optimization or bug fix? Since I have to support Debian 7 and probably
have to stick to audit 1.7 headers, is it safe to use the "old way"?
-Lev
10 years, 1 month
