On Fri, Mar 13, 2020 at 2:59 PM Richard Guy Briggs <rgb(a)redhat.com> wrote:
On 2020-03-13 12:29, Paul Moore wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 12, 2020 at 3:30 PM Richard Guy Briggs <rgb(a)redhat.com> wrote:
> > On 2020-02-13 16:44, Paul Moore wrote:
> > > This is a bit of a thread-hijack, and for that I apologize, but
> > > another thought crossed my mind while thinking about this issue
> > > further ... Once we support multiple auditd instances, including the
> > > necessary record routing and duplication/multiple-sends (the host
> > > always sees *everything*), we will likely need to find a way to
"trim"
> > > the audit container ID (ACID) lists we send in the records. The
> > > auditd instance running on the host/initns will always see everything,
> > > so it will want the full container ACID list; however an auditd
> > > instance running inside a container really should only see the ACIDs
> > > of any child containers.
> >
> > Agreed. This should be easy to check and limit, preventing an auditd
> > from seeing any contid that is a parent of its own contid.
> >
> > > For example, imagine a system where the host has containers 1 and 2,
> > > each running an auditd instance. Inside container 1 there are
> > > containers A and B. Inside container 2 there are containers Y and Z.
> > > If an audit event is generated in container Z, I would expect the
> > > host's auditd to see a ACID list of "1,Z" but container
1's auditd
> > > should only see an ACID list of "Z". The auditd running in
container
> > > 2 should not see the record at all (that will be relatively
> > > straightforward). Does that make sense? Do we have the record
> > > formats properly designed to handle this without too much problem
(I'm
> > > not entirely sure we do)?
> >
> > I completely agree and I believe we have record formats that are able to
> > handle this already.
>
> I'm not convinced we do. What about the cases where we have a field
> with a list of audit container IDs? How do we handle that?
I don't understand the problem. (I think you crossed your 1/2 vs
A/B/Y/Z in your example.) ...
It looks like I did, sorry about that.
... Clarifying the example above, if as you
suggest an event happens in container Z, the hosts's auditd would report
Z,^2
and the auditd in container 2 would report
Z,^2
but if there were another auditd running in container Z it would report
Z
while the auditd in container 1 or A/B would see nothing.
Yes. My concern is how do we handle this to minimize duplicating and
rewriting the records? It isn't so much about the format, although
the format is a side effect.
--
paul moore
www.paul-moore.com