Re: [userspace PATCH v2 0/2] Add support for loginuid_set

On Tuesday, October 11, 2016 4:54:26 PM EDT Paul Moore wrote: > On Tue, Oct 11, 2016 at 4:50 PM, Steve Grubb <sgrubb(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: > > On Tuesday, October 11, 2016 4:42:58 PM EDT Paul Moore wrote: > >> On Tue, Oct 11, 2016 at 3:22 PM, Steve Grubb <sgrubb(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: > >> > On Tuesday, October 11, 2016 2:27:54 PM EDT Richard Guy Briggs wrote: > >> >> On 2016-10-11 12:40, Steve Grubb wrote: > >> >> > On Monday, October 10, 2016 5:10:39 PM EDT Paul Moore wrote: > >> >> > > On Mon, Oct 10, 2016 at 1:24 PM, Steve Grubb <sgrubb(a)redhat.com&gt; > > > > wrote: > >> >> > > > On Thursday, August 18, 2016 2:18:55 PM EDT Richard Guy Briggs > > > > wrote: > >> >> > > >> loginuid_set support should have been added to userspace when > >> >> > > >> it > >> >> > > >> was > >> >> > > >> added to the kernel around v3.10. Add it before we do similar > >> >> > > >> for > >> >> > > >> sessionID and sessionID_set. > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > If this were accepted, how would this change writing rules? IOW, > >> >> > > > can > >> >> > > > you > >> >> > > > give an example rule so we can see what this looks like? > >> >> > > > >> >> > > We have a RFE feature page which documents some rule examples: > >> >> > > > >> >> > > * > >> >> > > https://github.com/linux-audit/audit-kernel/wiki/RFE-Session-ID-Us > >> >> > > er-> >> > > Fil ter > >> >> > > >> >> > OK, thanks. This is helpful. So, what is the difference between > >> >> > these > >> >> > rules? > >> >> > > >> >> > -a always,exit -F path=/tmp/sessionid_test -F loginuid=-1 > >> >> > > >> >> > -a always,exit -F path=/tmp/sessionid_set_test -F loginuid_set=0 > >> >> > >> >> The only difference is one flag in the kernel to indicate how it was > >> >> invoked to be able to report when queried exactly the same way it was > >> >> invoked, but there is no difference in the actual behaviour of the > >> >> filter. This was added because of your report that "f24=0" was > >> >> reported > >> >> instead of loginuid_set=0 for backwards compatibility. > >> > > >> > OK. Generally its bad to have 2 ways to do the same thing. People use > >> > SCAP > >> > content to check system configurations. If there's two ways to do the > >> > same > >> > thing, then someone can accidentally choose the wrong way and fail > >> > their > >> > scan. We run into this in the past where we allowed -a exit,always and > >> > -a > >> > always,exit. All the rules had to be reworked to be consistent. > >> > Therefore, I would recommend not using the loginuid_set option. We > >> > still > >> > get questions about -w /path/file -p wa vs -a always,exit -F > >> > path=/path/file -F perm=wa. But that one is so deeply embedded that it > >> > should not be fixed. > >> > > >> >> Going forward, the implementation of the sessionid_set field (which > >> >> works similarly) will not allow an unset value of sessionid since > >> >> these > >> >> are a new addition that didn't need to accomodate backward > >> >> compatibility. > >> > > >> > As long as we can trigger on sessionid=-1, then we are fine. > >> > >> Wait a minute ... what happened to the loginuid_set patches? Didn't > >> those get merged to userspace? > > > > I'm reviewing this patch set for merging now that we are past all the 2.6 > > bug fixing. > > Ah, nevermind ... I confused loginuid and sessionid, sorry about the > confusion. > > Anyway, I thought the desire for having a dedicated "is the loginuid > value set?" filter came from userspace? If not, where did this > requirement come from? I don't know where it came from. We have always used -1 for unset loginuid and session id.