Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.kernel > #1255096

Re: Should audit_seccomp check audit_enabled?

Show all headers | View raw

On October 23, 2015 5:30:45 PM Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net> wrote:

> On Fri, Oct 23, 2015 at 2:22 PM, Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org> wrote:
>> On Fri, Oct 23, 2015 at 2:07 PM, Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net> wrote:
>>> On Oct 23, 2015 10:01 AM, "Kees Cook" <keescook@chromium.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, Oct 23, 2015 at 9:19 AM, Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net> wrote:
>>>> > I would argue that, if auditing is off, audit_seccomp shouldn't do
>>>> > anything.  After all, unlike e.g. selinux, seccomp is not a systemwide
>>>> > policy, and seccomp signals might be ordinary behavior that's internal
>>>> > to the seccomp-using application.  IOW, for people with audit compiled
>>>> > in and subscribed by journald but switched off, I think that the
>>>> > records shouldn't be emitted.
>>>> >
>>>> > If you agree, I can send the two-line patch.
>>>>
>>>> I think signr==0 states (which I would identify as "intended
>>>> behavior") don't need to be reported under any situation, but audit
>>>> folks wanted to keep it around.
>>>
>>> Even if there is a nonzero signr, it could just be a program opting to
>>> trap and emulate one of its own syscalls.
>>
>> At present, that is a rare situation. Programs tend to be ptrace
>> managed externally. Is there anything catching SIGSYS itself?
>>
>
> I wrote one once.  I also wrote a whole set of patches for libseccomp
> to make it easier that never went anywhere -- I should dust those off
> and package them into their own library.

It has been a while since we discussed those patches, but if I remember 
correctly it was going to be very difficult to do it in an arch agnostic 
way and that was a concern.

--
paul moore
www.paul-moore.com


--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Should audit_seccomp check audit_enabled? Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net> - 2015-10-23 18:20 +0200
  Re: Should audit_seccomp check audit_enabled? Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org> - 2015-10-23 19:10 +0200
    Re: Should audit_seccomp check audit_enabled? Paul Moore <paul@paul-moore.com> - 2015-10-23 21:40 +0200
      Re: Should audit_seccomp check audit_enabled? Steve Grubb <sgrubb@redhat.com> - 2015-10-23 23:00 +0200
        Re: Should audit_seccomp check audit_enabled? Paul Moore <paul@paul-moore.com> - 2015-10-23 23:00 +0200
          Re: Should audit_seccomp check audit_enabled? Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net> - 2015-10-23 23:10 +0200
    Re: Should audit_seccomp check audit_enabled? Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net> - 2015-10-23 23:10 +0200
      Re: Should audit_seccomp check audit_enabled? Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net> - 2015-10-23 23:30 +0200
        Re: Should audit_seccomp check audit_enabled? Paul Moore <paul@paul-moore.com> - 2015-10-24 04:30 +0200
      Re: Should audit_seccomp check audit_enabled? Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org> - 2015-10-23 23:30 +0200
  Re: Should audit_seccomp check audit_enabled? Richard Guy Briggs <rgb@redhat.com> - 2015-10-23 21:20 +0200

csiph-web