Re: Clarification Around File System Auditing
Thanks for the reply.
I was trying to evaluate the same via Flamegraphs and what I noticed was
that :
1. Despite deleting all rules (auditctl -D), there were still calls to
audit_filter_syscall() on each syscall. I assume this is because syscall
auditing is enabled and despite no rules, there still will be some
performance impact and calls to syscall filtering functions on each syscall.
2. For a single watch rule as well without any syscall rules, I could see
calls to audit_filter_syscall() followed by audit_filter_rules() for
unrelated syscalls such as futex() and recvmsg() - not present in
include/asm-generic/audit_*.h
Why would these functions be called for a single watch rule for syscalls
unrelated to the permissions?
On Tue, Feb 14, 2023 at 8:29 AM Steve Grubb <sgrubb(a)redhat.com> wrote:
Hello,
On Monday, February 13, 2023 4:24:02 PM EST Amjad Gabbar wrote:
> I wanted some help in better understanding the workflow of file system
> auditing(watch rules) vs Syscall Auditing(syscall rules). I know in
general
> file system auditing does not have the same performance impact as syscall
> auditing, even though both make use of syscall exits for their
evaluation.
>
>
> From the manpage - "Unlike most syscall auditing rules, watches do not
> impact performance based on the number of rules sent to the kernel."
>
> From a previous thread, I found this excerpt regarding file watch rules
vs
> sycall rules -
>
> "The reason it doesn't have performance impact like normal syscall rules
is
> because it gets moved to a list that is not evaluated every syscall. A
> normal syscall rule will get evaluated for every syscall because it has
to
> see if the syscall number is of interest and then it checks the next
> rule."
>
> Based on this I had a couple of questions:
>
> For normal syscall rules, the evaluation happens as __audit_syscall_exit
> <https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v6.1.10/C/ident/__audit_syscall_exit>
> calls audit_filter_syscall
> (https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v6.1.10/source/kernel/auditsc.c#L841)
>
> Here, we check if the syscall is of interest or not in the audit_in_mask
> <https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v6.1.10/C/ident/audit_in_mask>
function.
> Only if the syscall is of interest do we proceed with examining the task
> and return on the first rule match.
>
> 1. What is the process or code path for watch rules? audit_filter_syscall
> <https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v6.1.10/C/ident/audit_filter_syscall>
is
> called for watch rules as well. Then how is it that these are not called
> for every syscall? Could you point me to the code where the evaluation
> happens only once?
There is a file, kernel/audit_watch.c, that implements the interface
between
audit and fsnotify. You would want to learn how fsnotify works to
understand
how it avoids the syscall filter.
> 2. Also, do file watches only involve the open system call family (open,
> openat etc). The man page implies the same, so just wanted to confirm.
>
> I assume -w /etc -p wa is the same as -a always,exit -S open -S openat -F
> dir=/etc?
It depends on the flag passed for perm as to what syscall it wants. See:
include/asm-generic/audit_*.h
-Steve
Attachments:
- attachment.html (text/html — 4.5 KB)