On Monday, January 26, 2015 03:14:20 PM hsultan(a)thefroid.net wrote: > So I'm curious, auditd catches abnormal process termination > (SIGSEGV, > ...) with a 1701 audit message, can catch 'clean' termination by > monitoring syscall (exit, exitgroup), however I don't see anything > to > catch process termination by a SIGKILL. > if I audit the kill() system call then I see the call to send the > signal, but I would have expected the system to offer auditing of an > actual SIGKILL *reception* (because you can pass -1 as target PID to > sigkill, which kills all processes reachable by the caller and will > make > auditing by syscall very hard to do), am I missing something ? I don't think so. > Is there a parameter to set somehow that I'm missing ? No. This would probably need some kind of kernel patch to enable. Its never really come up that anyone would want to monitor for this. Typically the monitoring is on the sending side rather than the receiving side. We collect anything that leads to a core dump because that is an anomally. No one should have segfaulting code on a production system. However, the kernel does not allow a SIGKILL to be delivered to processes the user has no rights to send it to, so its not really an abnormal event. I could see someone maybe wanting to monitor this, but its never been a priority to solve this problem.

Do you have to implement it using audit subsystem? If you want to track process activity for temporary (or debug) purpose, SystemTap would do it. ---------- program start ---------- # stap -e ' probe kernel.function("do_exit") { if ($code & 0x7F) printf("%s %s(%u) exiting with signal %u\n", ctime(gettimeofday_s()), execname(), pid(), $code & 0x7F); }' ---------- program end ---------- ---------- output example start ---------- Sat May 3 06:00:39 2014 a.out(2101) exiting with signal 11 Sat May 3 06:00:48 2014 sleep(2102) exiting with signal 2 Sat May 3 06:01:17 2014 sleep(2105) exiting with signal 9 Sat May 3 06:01:21 2014 a.out(2131) exiting with signal 11 ---------- output example end ---------- > > I'll try to figure out what a patch to audit the KILL reception > would > look like, intent would be to provide the sender's PID + the target > PID > in the audit msg. Should that be a new AUDIT msg type or do you see > it > fit within an existing msg type ? SystemTap would do it, if you can accept SystemTap.