Re: What STIG audit rule picks up type=SOFTWARE_UPDATE events?

This brings up the question of where I can find the audit events which are generated by rpm?

Also dnf/yum if they directly generate events?

A very quick scan of the rpm source code doesn't reveal anything.

On 5/14/23 14:46, Steven Grubb wrote: > Hello, > > > On Fri, May 12, 2023 at 5:23 PM Wieprecht, Karen M. > > <Karen.Wieprecht(a)jhuapl.edu&gt; wrote: > All, > > Do you happen to know which if the standard STIG rules is picking > up type=SOFTWARE_UPDATE events on RHEL 7 and 8 ? > > None. rpm has been altered to produce these much the same as pam > produces login events. It was too tricky to tell the intent to update > vs querying the rpm database. And you have no way to answer the > question about success without originating from inside rpm itself. I > don't think any external rules can meet all requirements imposed by > OSPP, which the STIG audit rules are loosely based on. > > -Steve > > I’m trying to figure out if we missed one of these rules on an > Ubuntu 20 system we are configuring or if maybe the audit > subsystem implementation on that system doesn’t pick up all of the > same record types as we get on our RHEL boxes. I realized when I > started looking at this that it’s not easy to determine which > audit rule is picking up a particular event if it’s not one of the > rule that has a key associated with it. > > As a possible alternative, I ran across a sample audit.rules > list here GitHub - Neo23x0/auditd: Best Practice Auditd > Configuration <https://github.com/Neo23x0/auditd> (actual rules > file is here: auditd/audit.rules at master · Neo23x0/auditd · > GitHub > <https://github.com/Neo23x0/auditd/blob/master/audit.rules>) which > included some software management rules that don’t appear to be > part of the standard “30-stig.rules” . > > If the standard STIG rules don’t pick up type=SOFTWARE_UPDATE > events on Ubuntu20, I might add some of these , so I was hoping > to have a quick sanity check on whether these look like > appropriate alternatives. Any recommendations or comments > regarding these sample rules would be much appreciated. Basically > it looks to me like they are just setting watches for anyone > executing these various commands, which shouldn’t cause to much > noise in the logs except maybe when we are patching which is one > of the continuous monitoring items I need to be able to confirm. > > Thanks much! > > Karen Wieprecht > > # Software Management > --------------------------------------------------------- > > # RPM (Redhat/CentOS) > > -w /usr/bin/rpm -p x -k software_mgmt > > -w /usr/bin/yum -p x -k software_mgmt > > # DNF (Fedora/RedHat 8/CentOS 8) > > -w /usr/bin/dnf -p x -k software_mgmt > > # YAST/Zypper/RPM (SuSE) > > -w /sbin/yast -p x -k software_mgmt > > -w /sbin/yast2 -p x -k software_mgmt > > -w /bin/rpm -p x -k software_mgmt > > -w /usr/bin/zypper -k software_mgmt > > # DPKG / APT-GET (Debian/Ubuntu) > > -w /usr/bin/dpkg -p x -k software_mgmt > > -w /usr/bin/apt -p x -k software_mgmt > > -w /usr/bin/apt-add-repository -p x -k software_mgmt > > -w /usr/bin/apt-get -p x -k software_mgmt > > -w /usr/bin/aptitude -p x -k software_mgmt > > -w /usr/bin/wajig -p x -k software_mgmt > > -w /usr/bin/snap -p x -k software_mgmt > > # PIP(3) (Python installs) > > -w /usr/bin/pip -p x -k T1072_third_party_software > > -w /usr/local/bin/pip -p x -k T1072_third_party_software > > -w /usr/bin/pip3 -p x -k T1072_third_party_software > > -w /usr/local/bin/pip3 -p x -k T1072_third_party_software > > # npm > > ## T1072 third party software > > ## https://www.npmjs.com > > ## https://docs.npmjs.com/cli/v6/commands/npm-audit > > -w /usr/bin/npm -p x -k T1072_third_party_software > > -- > Linux-audit mailing list > Linux-audit(a)redhat.com > https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-audit > > -- > Linux-audit mailing list > Linux-audit(a)redhat.com > https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-audit