Re: [PATCH] audit: set TIF_AUDIT_SYSCALL only if audit filter has been populated

On Wed, 14 Mar 2018, Andy Lutomirski wrote: > > Yes...I wished I was in on the beginning of this discussion. Here's the > > problem. We need all tasks auditable unless specifically dismissed as > > uninteresting. This would be a task,never rule. > > > > The way we look at it, is if it boots with audit=1, then we know auditd > > is expected to run at some point. So, we need all tasks to stay > > auditable. If they weren't and auditd enabled auditing, then we'd need > > to walk the whole proctable and stab TIF_AUDIT_SYSCALL into every > > process in the system. It was decided that this is too ugly. > > When was that decided? That's what this patch does. I'd like to see some more justification as well.

Namely, if I compare "setting TIF_AUDIT_SYSCALL for every process on a need-to-be-so basis" to "we always go through the slow path and pessimistically assume that audit is enabled and has reasonable ruleset loaded", I have my own (different) opinion of what is too ugly.