On Thu, Feb 15, 2018 at 1:16 AM, Kees Cook <keescook(a)chromium.org> wrote:
On Wed, Feb 14, 2018 at 6:33 PM, Richard Guy Briggs
<rgb(a)redhat.com> wrote:
> On 2018-02-14 09:51, Kees Cook wrote:
>> On Wed, Feb 14, 2018 at 8:18 AM, Richard Guy Briggs <rgb(a)redhat.com>
wrote:
>> > Audit link denied events emit disjointed records when audit is disabled.
>> > No records should be emitted when audit is disabled.
>> >
>> > See:
https://github.com/linux-audit/audit-kernel/issues/21
>> > Signed-off-by: Richard Guy Briggs <rgb(a)redhat.com>
>> > ---
>> > kernel/audit.c | 3 +++
>> > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
>> >
>> > diff --git a/kernel/audit.c b/kernel/audit.c
>> > index 227db99..4c3fd24 100644
>> > --- a/kernel/audit.c
>> > +++ b/kernel/audit.c
>> > @@ -2261,6 +2261,9 @@ void audit_log_link_denied(const char *operation,
const struct path *link)
>> > struct audit_buffer *ab;
>> > struct audit_names *name;
>> >
>> > + if (!audit_enabled || audit_dummy_context())
>> > + return;
>> > +
>> > name = kzalloc(sizeof(*name), GFP_NOFS);
>> > if (!name)
>> > return;
>>
>> Doesn't this means errors here would be silent if audit isn't enabled?
>> I don't that; sysadmins should see this notification regardless of the
>> audit state...
>
> This is a user error and not a system error, so I would think if system
> auditing is disabled, they don't care about this kind of error.
It could indicate an attack attempt...
We get beat up by several folks when we emit audit records with audit
disabled, and they have a very valid point.
I'm not arguing that the information isn't useful, I'm arguing that if
you are interested in the sort of information that audit provides you
should enable audit. :)
--
paul moore
www.paul-moore.com