There were two formats of the audit MAC_STATUS record, one of which was more
standard than the other. One listed enforcing status changes and the
other listed enabled status changes with a non-standard label. In
addition, the record was missing information about which LSM was
responsible and the operation's completion status. While this record is
only issued on success, the parser expects the res= field to be present.
old enforcing/permissive:
type=MAC_STATUS msg=audit(1523312831.378:24514): enforcing=0 old_enforcing=1 auid=0 ses=1
old enable/disable:
type=MAC_STATUS msg=audit(1523312831.378:24514): selinux=0 auid=0 ses=1
List both sets of status and old values and add the lsm= field and the
res= field.
Here is the new format:
type=MAC_STATUS msg=audit(1523293828.657:891): enforcing=0 old_enforcing=1 auid=0 ses=1 enabled=1 old-enabled=1 lsm=selinux res=1
This record already accompanied a SYSCALL record.
See: https://github.com/linux-audit/audit-kernel/issues/46
Signed-off-by: Richard Guy Briggs <[email protected]>
---
security/selinux/selinuxfs.c | 11 +++++++----
1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
diff --git a/security/selinux/selinuxfs.c b/security/selinux/selinuxfs.c
index 00eed84..00b21b2 100644
--- a/security/selinux/selinuxfs.c
+++ b/security/selinux/selinuxfs.c
@@ -145,10 +145,11 @@ static ssize_t sel_write_enforce(struct file *file, const char __user *buf,
if (length)
goto out;
audit_log(current->audit_context, GFP_KERNEL, AUDIT_MAC_STATUS,
- "enforcing=%d old_enforcing=%d auid=%u ses=%u",
+ "enforcing=%d old_enforcing=%d auid=%u ses=%u"
+ " enabled=%d old-enabled=%d lsm=selinux res=1",
new_value, selinux_enforcing,
from_kuid(&init_user_ns, audit_get_loginuid(current)),
- audit_get_sessionid(current));
+ audit_get_sessionid(current), selinux_enabled, selinux_enabled);
selinux_enforcing = new_value;
if (selinux_enforcing)
avc_ss_reset(0);
@@ -272,9 +273,11 @@ static ssize_t sel_write_disable(struct file *file, const char __user *buf,
if (length)
goto out;
audit_log(current->audit_context, GFP_KERNEL, AUDIT_MAC_STATUS,
- "selinux=0 auid=%u ses=%u",
+ "enforcing=%d old_enforcing=%d auid=%u ses=%u"
+ " enabled=%d old-enabled=%d lsm=selinux res=1",
+ selinux_enforcing, selinux_enforcing,
from_kuid(&init_user_ns, audit_get_loginuid(current)),
- audit_get_sessionid(current));
+ audit_get_sessionid(current), 0, 1);
}
length = count;
--
1.8.3.1
On Mon, Apr 9, 2018 at 7:34 PM, Richard Guy Briggs <[email protected]> wrote:
> There were two formats of the audit MAC_STATUS record, one of which was more
> standard than the other. One listed enforcing status changes and the
> other listed enabled status changes with a non-standard label. In
> addition, the record was missing information about which LSM was
> responsible and the operation's completion status. While this record is
> only issued on success, the parser expects the res= field to be present.
>
> old enforcing/permissive:
> type=MAC_STATUS msg=audit(1523312831.378:24514): enforcing=0 old_enforcing=1 auid=0 ses=1
> old enable/disable:
> type=MAC_STATUS msg=audit(1523312831.378:24514): selinux=0 auid=0 ses=1
>
> List both sets of status and old values and add the lsm= field and the
> res= field.
>
> Here is the new format:
> type=MAC_STATUS msg=audit(1523293828.657:891): enforcing=0 old_enforcing=1 auid=0 ses=1 enabled=1 old-enabled=1 lsm=selinux res=1
>
> This record already accompanied a SYSCALL record.
>
> See: https://github.com/linux-audit/audit-kernel/issues/46
> Signed-off-by: Richard Guy Briggs <[email protected]>
> ---
> security/selinux/selinuxfs.c | 11 +++++++----
> 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/security/selinux/selinuxfs.c b/security/selinux/selinuxfs.c
> index 00eed84..00b21b2 100644
> --- a/security/selinux/selinuxfs.c
> +++ b/security/selinux/selinuxfs.c
> @@ -145,10 +145,11 @@ static ssize_t sel_write_enforce(struct file *file, const char __user *buf,
> if (length)
> goto out;
> audit_log(current->audit_context, GFP_KERNEL, AUDIT_MAC_STATUS,
> - "enforcing=%d old_enforcing=%d auid=%u ses=%u",
> + "enforcing=%d old_enforcing=%d auid=%u ses=%u"
> + " enabled=%d old-enabled=%d lsm=selinux res=1",
> new_value, selinux_enforcing,
> from_kuid(&init_user_ns, audit_get_loginuid(current)),
> - audit_get_sessionid(current));
> + audit_get_sessionid(current), selinux_enabled, selinux_enabled);
This looks fine.
> selinux_enforcing = new_value;
> if (selinux_enforcing)
> avc_ss_reset(0);
> @@ -272,9 +273,11 @@ static ssize_t sel_write_disable(struct file *file, const char __user *buf,
> if (length)
> goto out;
> audit_log(current->audit_context, GFP_KERNEL, AUDIT_MAC_STATUS,
> - "selinux=0 auid=%u ses=%u",
> + "enforcing=%d old_enforcing=%d auid=%u ses=%u"
> + " enabled=%d old-enabled=%d lsm=selinux res=1",
> + selinux_enforcing, selinux_enforcing,
> from_kuid(&init_user_ns, audit_get_loginuid(current)),
> - audit_get_sessionid(current));
> + audit_get_sessionid(current), 0, 1);
It needs to be said again that I'm opposed to changes like this:
inserting new fields, removing fields, or otherwise changing the
format in ways that aren't strictly the addition of new fields to the
end of a record is a Bad Thing. However, there are exceptions (there
are *always* exceptions), and this seems like a reasonable change that
shouldn't negatively affect anyone.
I'll merge this once the merge window comes to a close (we are going
to need to base selinux/next on v4.17-rc1).
> }
>
> length = count;
> --
> 1.8.3.1
>
--
paul moore
http://www.paul-moore.com
2018-04-10 1:34 GMT+02:00 Richard Guy Briggs <[email protected]>:
> There were two formats of the audit MAC_STATUS record, one of which was more
> standard than the other. One listed enforcing status changes and the
> other listed enabled status changes with a non-standard label. In
> addition, the record was missing information about which LSM was
> responsible and the operation's completion status. While this record is
> only issued on success, the parser expects the res= field to be present.
>
> old enforcing/permissive:
> type=MAC_STATUS msg=audit(1523312831.378:24514): enforcing=0 old_enforcing=1 auid=0 ses=1
> old enable/disable:
> type=MAC_STATUS msg=audit(1523312831.378:24514): selinux=0 auid=0 ses=1
>
> List both sets of status and old values and add the lsm= field and the
> res= field.
>
> Here is the new format:
> type=MAC_STATUS msg=audit(1523293828.657:891): enforcing=0 old_enforcing=1 auid=0 ses=1 enabled=1 old-enabled=1 lsm=selinux res=1
>
> This record already accompanied a SYSCALL record.
>
> See: https://github.com/linux-audit/audit-kernel/issues/46
> Signed-off-by: Richard Guy Briggs <[email protected]>
> ---
> security/selinux/selinuxfs.c | 11 +++++++----
> 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/security/selinux/selinuxfs.c b/security/selinux/selinuxfs.c
> index 00eed84..00b21b2 100644
> --- a/security/selinux/selinuxfs.c
> +++ b/security/selinux/selinuxfs.c
> @@ -145,10 +145,11 @@ static ssize_t sel_write_enforce(struct file *file, const char __user *buf,
> if (length)
> goto out;
> audit_log(current->audit_context, GFP_KERNEL, AUDIT_MAC_STATUS,
> - "enforcing=%d old_enforcing=%d auid=%u ses=%u",
> + "enforcing=%d old_enforcing=%d auid=%u ses=%u"
> + " enabled=%d old-enabled=%d lsm=selinux res=1",
This is just a tiny nit but why does "old_enforcing" use an underscore
and "old-enabled" a dash? Shouldn't the style be consistent across
fields?
Just my two cents...
> new_value, selinux_enforcing,
> from_kuid(&init_user_ns, audit_get_loginuid(current)),
> - audit_get_sessionid(current));
> + audit_get_sessionid(current), selinux_enabled, selinux_enabled);
> selinux_enforcing = new_value;
> if (selinux_enforcing)
> avc_ss_reset(0);
> @@ -272,9 +273,11 @@ static ssize_t sel_write_disable(struct file *file, const char __user *buf,
> if (length)
> goto out;
> audit_log(current->audit_context, GFP_KERNEL, AUDIT_MAC_STATUS,
> - "selinux=0 auid=%u ses=%u",
> + "enforcing=%d old_enforcing=%d auid=%u ses=%u"
> + " enabled=%d old-enabled=%d lsm=selinux res=1",
> + selinux_enforcing, selinux_enforcing,
^ also here
> from_kuid(&init_user_ns, audit_get_loginuid(current)),
> - audit_get_sessionid(current));
> + audit_get_sessionid(current), 0, 1);
> }
>
> length = count;
> --
> 1.8.3.1
>
> --
> Linux-audit mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-audit
--
Ondrej Mosnacek <omosnace at redhat dot com>
Associate Software Engineer, Security Technologies
Red Hat, Inc.
On 2018-04-16 09:26, Ondrej Mosnacek wrote:
> 2018-04-10 1:34 GMT+02:00 Richard Guy Briggs <[email protected]>:
> > There were two formats of the audit MAC_STATUS record, one of which was more
> > standard than the other. One listed enforcing status changes and the
> > other listed enabled status changes with a non-standard label. In
> > addition, the record was missing information about which LSM was
> > responsible and the operation's completion status. While this record is
> > only issued on success, the parser expects the res= field to be present.
> >
> > old enforcing/permissive:
> > type=MAC_STATUS msg=audit(1523312831.378:24514): enforcing=0 old_enforcing=1 auid=0 ses=1
> > old enable/disable:
> > type=MAC_STATUS msg=audit(1523312831.378:24514): selinux=0 auid=0 ses=1
> >
> > List both sets of status and old values and add the lsm= field and the
> > res= field.
> >
> > Here is the new format:
> > type=MAC_STATUS msg=audit(1523293828.657:891): enforcing=0 old_enforcing=1 auid=0 ses=1 enabled=1 old-enabled=1 lsm=selinux res=1
> >
> > This record already accompanied a SYSCALL record.
> >
> > See: https://github.com/linux-audit/audit-kernel/issues/46
> > Signed-off-by: Richard Guy Briggs <[email protected]>
> > ---
> > security/selinux/selinuxfs.c | 11 +++++++----
> > 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/security/selinux/selinuxfs.c b/security/selinux/selinuxfs.c
> > index 00eed84..00b21b2 100644
> > --- a/security/selinux/selinuxfs.c
> > +++ b/security/selinux/selinuxfs.c
> > @@ -145,10 +145,11 @@ static ssize_t sel_write_enforce(struct file *file, const char __user *buf,
> > if (length)
> > goto out;
> > audit_log(current->audit_context, GFP_KERNEL, AUDIT_MAC_STATUS,
> > - "enforcing=%d old_enforcing=%d auid=%u ses=%u",
> > + "enforcing=%d old_enforcing=%d auid=%u ses=%u"
> > + " enabled=%d old-enabled=%d lsm=selinux res=1",
>
> This is just a tiny nit but why does "old_enforcing" use an underscore
> and "old-enabled" a dash? Shouldn't the style be consistent across
> fields?
Yes, but my understanding is a preference for underscore, and not to
change existing field names.
Steve?
> Just my two cents...
These details are worth noticing, thank you.
> > new_value, selinux_enforcing,
> > from_kuid(&init_user_ns, audit_get_loginuid(current)),
> > - audit_get_sessionid(current));
> > + audit_get_sessionid(current), selinux_enabled, selinux_enabled);
> > selinux_enforcing = new_value;
> > if (selinux_enforcing)
> > avc_ss_reset(0);
> > @@ -272,9 +273,11 @@ static ssize_t sel_write_disable(struct file *file, const char __user *buf,
> > if (length)
> > goto out;
> > audit_log(current->audit_context, GFP_KERNEL, AUDIT_MAC_STATUS,
> > - "selinux=0 auid=%u ses=%u",
> > + "enforcing=%d old_enforcing=%d auid=%u ses=%u"
> > + " enabled=%d old-enabled=%d lsm=selinux res=1",
> > + selinux_enforcing, selinux_enforcing,
>
> ^ also here
>
> > from_kuid(&init_user_ns, audit_get_loginuid(current)),
> > - audit_get_sessionid(current));
> > + audit_get_sessionid(current), 0, 1);
> > }
> >
> > length = count;
>
> Ondrej Mosnacek <omosnace at redhat dot com>
- RGB
--
Richard Guy Briggs <[email protected]>
Sr. S/W Engineer, Kernel Security, Base Operating Systems
Remote, Ottawa, Red Hat Canada
IRC: rgb, SunRaycer
Voice: +1.647.777.2635, Internal: (81) 32635
2018-04-16 16:11 GMT+02:00 Richard Guy Briggs <[email protected]>:
> On 2018-04-16 09:26, Ondrej Mosnacek wrote:
>> 2018-04-10 1:34 GMT+02:00 Richard Guy Briggs <[email protected]>:
>> > There were two formats of the audit MAC_STATUS record, one of which was more
>> > standard than the other. One listed enforcing status changes and the
>> > other listed enabled status changes with a non-standard label. In
>> > addition, the record was missing information about which LSM was
>> > responsible and the operation's completion status. While this record is
>> > only issued on success, the parser expects the res= field to be present.
>> >
>> > old enforcing/permissive:
>> > type=MAC_STATUS msg=audit(1523312831.378:24514): enforcing=0 old_enforcing=1 auid=0 ses=1
>> > old enable/disable:
>> > type=MAC_STATUS msg=audit(1523312831.378:24514): selinux=0 auid=0 ses=1
>> >
>> > List both sets of status and old values and add the lsm= field and the
>> > res= field.
>> >
>> > Here is the new format:
>> > type=MAC_STATUS msg=audit(1523293828.657:891): enforcing=0 old_enforcing=1 auid=0 ses=1 enabled=1 old-enabled=1 lsm=selinux res=1
>> >
>> > This record already accompanied a SYSCALL record.
>> >
>> > See: https://github.com/linux-audit/audit-kernel/issues/46
>> > Signed-off-by: Richard Guy Briggs <[email protected]>
>> > ---
>> > security/selinux/selinuxfs.c | 11 +++++++----
>> > 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>> >
>> > diff --git a/security/selinux/selinuxfs.c b/security/selinux/selinuxfs.c
>> > index 00eed84..00b21b2 100644
>> > --- a/security/selinux/selinuxfs.c
>> > +++ b/security/selinux/selinuxfs.c
>> > @@ -145,10 +145,11 @@ static ssize_t sel_write_enforce(struct file *file, const char __user *buf,
>> > if (length)
>> > goto out;
>> > audit_log(current->audit_context, GFP_KERNEL, AUDIT_MAC_STATUS,
>> > - "enforcing=%d old_enforcing=%d auid=%u ses=%u",
>> > + "enforcing=%d old_enforcing=%d auid=%u ses=%u"
>> > + " enabled=%d old-enabled=%d lsm=selinux res=1",
>>
>> This is just a tiny nit but why does "old_enforcing" use an underscore
>> and "old-enabled" a dash? Shouldn't the style be consistent across
>> fields?
>
> Yes, but my understanding is a preference for underscore, and not to
> change existing field names.
Ah, I just noticed that the field is already used elsewhere in the
code, so it makes sense to keep it the same. I thought at first that
it is just a typo.
>
> Steve?
>
>> Just my two cents...
>
> These details are worth noticing, thank you.
>
>> > new_value, selinux_enforcing,
>> > from_kuid(&init_user_ns, audit_get_loginuid(current)),
>> > - audit_get_sessionid(current));
>> > + audit_get_sessionid(current), selinux_enabled, selinux_enabled);
>> > selinux_enforcing = new_value;
>> > if (selinux_enforcing)
>> > avc_ss_reset(0);
>> > @@ -272,9 +273,11 @@ static ssize_t sel_write_disable(struct file *file, const char __user *buf,
>> > if (length)
>> > goto out;
>> > audit_log(current->audit_context, GFP_KERNEL, AUDIT_MAC_STATUS,
>> > - "selinux=0 auid=%u ses=%u",
>> > + "enforcing=%d old_enforcing=%d auid=%u ses=%u"
>> > + " enabled=%d old-enabled=%d lsm=selinux res=1",
>> > + selinux_enforcing, selinux_enforcing,
>>
>> ^ also here
>>
>> > from_kuid(&init_user_ns, audit_get_loginuid(current)),
>> > - audit_get_sessionid(current));
>> > + audit_get_sessionid(current), 0, 1);
>> > }
>> >
>> > length = count;
>>
>> Ondrej Mosnacek <omosnace at redhat dot com>
>
> - RGB
>
> --
> Richard Guy Briggs <[email protected]>
> Sr. S/W Engineer, Kernel Security, Base Operating Systems
> Remote, Ottawa, Red Hat Canada
> IRC: rgb, SunRaycer
> Voice: +1.647.777.2635, Internal: (81) 32635
--
Ondrej Mosnacek <omosnace at redhat dot com>
Associate Software Engineer, Security Technologies
Red Hat, Inc.
On Monday, April 16, 2018 10:11:01 AM EDT Richard Guy Briggs wrote:
> On 2018-04-16 09:26, Ondrej Mosnacek wrote:
> > 2018-04-10 1:34 GMT+02:00 Richard Guy Briggs <[email protected]>:
> > > There were two formats of the audit MAC_STATUS record, one of which was
> > > more standard than the other. One listed enforcing status changes and
> > > the other listed enabled status changes with a non-standard label. In
> > > addition, the record was missing information about which LSM was
> > > responsible and the operation's completion status. While this record
> > > is
> > > only issued on success, the parser expects the res= field to be
> > > present.
> > >
> > > old enforcing/permissive:
> > > type=MAC_STATUS msg=audit(1523312831.378:24514): enforcing=0
> > > old_enforcing=1 auid=0 ses=1 old enable/disable:
> > > type=MAC_STATUS msg=audit(1523312831.378:24514): selinux=0 auid=0 ses=1
> > >
> > > List both sets of status and old values and add the lsm= field and the
> > > res= field.
> > >
> > > Here is the new format:
> > > type=MAC_STATUS msg=audit(1523293828.657:891): enforcing=0
> > > old_enforcing=1 auid=0 ses=1 enabled=1 old-enabled=1 lsm=selinux res=1
> > >
> > > This record already accompanied a SYSCALL record.
> > >
> > > See: https://github.com/linux-audit/audit-kernel/issues/46
> > > Signed-off-by: Richard Guy Briggs <[email protected]>
> > > ---
> > >
> > > security/selinux/selinuxfs.c | 11 +++++++----
> > > 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/security/selinux/selinuxfs.c
> > > b/security/selinux/selinuxfs.c
> > > index 00eed84..00b21b2 100644
> > > --- a/security/selinux/selinuxfs.c
> > > +++ b/security/selinux/selinuxfs.c
> > > @@ -145,10 +145,11 @@ static ssize_t sel_write_enforce(struct file
> > > *file, const char __user *buf,> >
> > > if (length)
> > >
> > > goto out;
> > >
> > > audit_log(current->audit_context, GFP_KERNEL,
> > > AUDIT_MAC_STATUS,
> > >
> > > - "enforcing=%d old_enforcing=%d auid=%u ses=%u",
> > > + "enforcing=%d old_enforcing=%d auid=%u ses=%u"
> > > + " enabled=%d old-enabled=%d lsm=selinux res=1",
> >
> > This is just a tiny nit but why does "old_enforcing" use an underscore
> > and "old-enabled" a dash? Shouldn't the style be consistent across
> > fields?
Well, we have this thing called the field dictionary:
https://github.com/linux-audit/audit-documentation/blob/master/specs/fields/
field-dictionary.csv
If a field exists, we should reuse it and follow the exact formatting for the
value side. In this case, old_enforcing is in the dictionary. So, it should
be used.
> Yes, but my understanding is a preference for underscore, and not to
> change existing field names.
>
> Steve?
When you are gluing 2 words together, I prefer a dash. But, in this case we
alreday have precedent that the field name exists, so we should reuse it.
-Steve
> > Just my two cents...
>
> These details are worth noticing, thank you.
>
> > > new_value, selinux_enforcing,
> > > from_kuid(&init_user_ns,
> > > audit_get_loginuid(current)),
> > >
> > > - audit_get_sessionid(current));
> > > + audit_get_sessionid(current), selinux_enabled,
> > > selinux_enabled);> >
> > > selinux_enforcing = new_value;
> > > if (selinux_enforcing)
> > >
> > > avc_ss_reset(0);
> > >
> > > @@ -272,9 +273,11 @@ static ssize_t sel_write_disable(struct file
> > > *file, const char __user *buf,> >
> > > if (length)
> > >
> > > goto out;
> > >
> > > audit_log(current->audit_context, GFP_KERNEL,
> > > AUDIT_MAC_STATUS,
> > >
> > > - "selinux=0 auid=%u ses=%u",
> > > + "enforcing=%d old_enforcing=%d auid=%u ses=%u"
> > > + " enabled=%d old-enabled=%d lsm=selinux res=1",
> > > + selinux_enforcing, selinux_enforcing,
> >
> > ^ also here
> >
> > > from_kuid(&init_user_ns,
> > > audit_get_loginuid(current)),
> > >
> > > - audit_get_sessionid(current));
> > > + audit_get_sessionid(current), 0, 1);
> > >
> > > }
> > >
> > > length = count;
> >
> > Ondrej Mosnacek <omosnace at redhat dot com>
>
> - RGB
>
> --
> Richard Guy Briggs <[email protected]>
> Sr. S/W Engineer, Kernel Security, Base Operating Systems
> Remote, Ottawa, Red Hat Canada
> IRC: rgb, SunRaycer
> Voice: +1.647.777.2635, Internal: (81) 32635
>
> --
> Linux-audit mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-audit
On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 5:08 PM, Paul Moore <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 9, 2018 at 7:34 PM, Richard Guy Briggs <[email protected]> wrote:
>> There were two formats of the audit MAC_STATUS record, one of which was more
>> standard than the other. One listed enforcing status changes and the
>> other listed enabled status changes with a non-standard label. In
>> addition, the record was missing information about which LSM was
>> responsible and the operation's completion status. While this record is
>> only issued on success, the parser expects the res= field to be present.
>>
>> old enforcing/permissive:
>> type=MAC_STATUS msg=audit(1523312831.378:24514): enforcing=0 old_enforcing=1 auid=0 ses=1
>> old enable/disable:
>> type=MAC_STATUS msg=audit(1523312831.378:24514): selinux=0 auid=0 ses=1
>>
>> List both sets of status and old values and add the lsm= field and the
>> res= field.
>>
>> Here is the new format:
>> type=MAC_STATUS msg=audit(1523293828.657:891): enforcing=0 old_enforcing=1 auid=0 ses=1 enabled=1 old-enabled=1 lsm=selinux res=1
>>
>> This record already accompanied a SYSCALL record.
>>
>> See: https://github.com/linux-audit/audit-kernel/issues/46
>> Signed-off-by: Richard Guy Briggs <[email protected]>
>> ---
>> security/selinux/selinuxfs.c | 11 +++++++----
>> 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/security/selinux/selinuxfs.c b/security/selinux/selinuxfs.c
>> index 00eed84..00b21b2 100644
>> --- a/security/selinux/selinuxfs.c
>> +++ b/security/selinux/selinuxfs.c
>> @@ -145,10 +145,11 @@ static ssize_t sel_write_enforce(struct file *file, const char __user *buf,
>> if (length)
>> goto out;
>> audit_log(current->audit_context, GFP_KERNEL, AUDIT_MAC_STATUS,
>> - "enforcing=%d old_enforcing=%d auid=%u ses=%u",
>> + "enforcing=%d old_enforcing=%d auid=%u ses=%u"
>> + " enabled=%d old-enabled=%d lsm=selinux res=1",
>> new_value, selinux_enforcing,
>> from_kuid(&init_user_ns, audit_get_loginuid(current)),
>> - audit_get_sessionid(current));
>> + audit_get_sessionid(current), selinux_enabled, selinux_enabled);
>
> This looks fine.
>
>> selinux_enforcing = new_value;
>> if (selinux_enforcing)
>> avc_ss_reset(0);
>> @@ -272,9 +273,11 @@ static ssize_t sel_write_disable(struct file *file, const char __user *buf,
>> if (length)
>> goto out;
>> audit_log(current->audit_context, GFP_KERNEL, AUDIT_MAC_STATUS,
>> - "selinux=0 auid=%u ses=%u",
>> + "enforcing=%d old_enforcing=%d auid=%u ses=%u"
>> + " enabled=%d old-enabled=%d lsm=selinux res=1",
>> + selinux_enforcing, selinux_enforcing,
>> from_kuid(&init_user_ns, audit_get_loginuid(current)),
>> - audit_get_sessionid(current));
>> + audit_get_sessionid(current), 0, 1);
>
> It needs to be said again that I'm opposed to changes like this:
> inserting new fields, removing fields, or otherwise changing the
> format in ways that aren't strictly the addition of new fields to the
> end of a record is a Bad Thing. However, there are exceptions (there
> are *always* exceptions), and this seems like a reasonable change that
> shouldn't negatively affect anyone.
>
> I'll merge this once the merge window comes to a close (we are going
> to need to base selinux/next on v4.17-rc1).
Merged into selinux/next, although I should mention that there were
some actual code changes because of the SELinux state consolidation
patches that went into v4.17. The changes were small but please take
a look and make sure everything still looks okay to you.
>> }
>>
>> length = count;
>> --
>> 1.8.3.1
--
paul moore
http://www.paul-moore.com
On 2018-04-17 17:59, Paul Moore wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 5:08 PM, Paul Moore <[email protected]> wrote:
> > On Mon, Apr 9, 2018 at 7:34 PM, Richard Guy Briggs <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> There were two formats of the audit MAC_STATUS record, one of which was more
> >> standard than the other. One listed enforcing status changes and the
> >> other listed enabled status changes with a non-standard label. In
> >> addition, the record was missing information about which LSM was
> >> responsible and the operation's completion status. While this record is
> >> only issued on success, the parser expects the res= field to be present.
> >>
> >> old enforcing/permissive:
> >> type=MAC_STATUS msg=audit(1523312831.378:24514): enforcing=0 old_enforcing=1 auid=0 ses=1
> >> old enable/disable:
> >> type=MAC_STATUS msg=audit(1523312831.378:24514): selinux=0 auid=0 ses=1
> >>
> >> List both sets of status and old values and add the lsm= field and the
> >> res= field.
> >>
> >> Here is the new format:
> >> type=MAC_STATUS msg=audit(1523293828.657:891): enforcing=0 old_enforcing=1 auid=0 ses=1 enabled=1 old-enabled=1 lsm=selinux res=1
> >>
> >> This record already accompanied a SYSCALL record.
> >>
> >> See: https://github.com/linux-audit/audit-kernel/issues/46
> >> Signed-off-by: Richard Guy Briggs <[email protected]>
> >> ---
> >> security/selinux/selinuxfs.c | 11 +++++++----
> >> 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/security/selinux/selinuxfs.c b/security/selinux/selinuxfs.c
> >> index 00eed84..00b21b2 100644
> >> --- a/security/selinux/selinuxfs.c
> >> +++ b/security/selinux/selinuxfs.c
> >> @@ -145,10 +145,11 @@ static ssize_t sel_write_enforce(struct file *file, const char __user *buf,
> >> if (length)
> >> goto out;
> >> audit_log(current->audit_context, GFP_KERNEL, AUDIT_MAC_STATUS,
> >> - "enforcing=%d old_enforcing=%d auid=%u ses=%u",
> >> + "enforcing=%d old_enforcing=%d auid=%u ses=%u"
> >> + " enabled=%d old-enabled=%d lsm=selinux res=1",
> >> new_value, selinux_enforcing,
> >> from_kuid(&init_user_ns, audit_get_loginuid(current)),
> >> - audit_get_sessionid(current));
> >> + audit_get_sessionid(current), selinux_enabled, selinux_enabled);
> >
> > This looks fine.
> >
> >> selinux_enforcing = new_value;
> >> if (selinux_enforcing)
> >> avc_ss_reset(0);
> >> @@ -272,9 +273,11 @@ static ssize_t sel_write_disable(struct file *file, const char __user *buf,
> >> if (length)
> >> goto out;
> >> audit_log(current->audit_context, GFP_KERNEL, AUDIT_MAC_STATUS,
> >> - "selinux=0 auid=%u ses=%u",
> >> + "enforcing=%d old_enforcing=%d auid=%u ses=%u"
> >> + " enabled=%d old-enabled=%d lsm=selinux res=1",
> >> + selinux_enforcing, selinux_enforcing,
> >> from_kuid(&init_user_ns, audit_get_loginuid(current)),
> >> - audit_get_sessionid(current));
> >> + audit_get_sessionid(current), 0, 1);
> >
> > It needs to be said again that I'm opposed to changes like this:
> > inserting new fields, removing fields, or otherwise changing the
> > format in ways that aren't strictly the addition of new fields to the
> > end of a record is a Bad Thing. However, there are exceptions (there
> > are *always* exceptions), and this seems like a reasonable change that
> > shouldn't negatively affect anyone.
> >
> > I'll merge this once the merge window comes to a close (we are going
> > to need to base selinux/next on v4.17-rc1).
>
> Merged into selinux/next, although I should mention that there were
> some actual code changes because of the SELinux state consolidation
> patches that went into v4.17. The changes were small but please take
> a look and make sure everything still looks okay to you.
Ok, that was a bit disruptive, but looks ok to me.
> >> }
> >>
> >> length = count;
> >> --
> >> 1.8.3.1
>
> --
> paul moore
> http://www.paul-moore.com
- RGB
--
Richard Guy Briggs <[email protected]>
Sr. S/W Engineer, Kernel Security, Base Operating Systems
Remote, Ottawa, Red Hat Canada
IRC: rgb, SunRaycer
Voice: +1.647.777.2635, Internal: (81) 32635
On Tue, Apr 17, 2018 at 6:09 PM, Richard Guy Briggs <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 2018-04-17 17:59, Paul Moore wrote:
>> On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 5:08 PM, Paul Moore <[email protected]> wrote:
>> > On Mon, Apr 9, 2018 at 7:34 PM, Richard Guy Briggs <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >> There were two formats of the audit MAC_STATUS record, one of which was more
>> >> standard than the other. One listed enforcing status changes and the
>> >> other listed enabled status changes with a non-standard label. In
>> >> addition, the record was missing information about which LSM was
>> >> responsible and the operation's completion status. While this record is
>> >> only issued on success, the parser expects the res= field to be present.
>> >>
>> >> old enforcing/permissive:
>> >> type=MAC_STATUS msg=audit(1523312831.378:24514): enforcing=0 old_enforcing=1 auid=0 ses=1
>> >> old enable/disable:
>> >> type=MAC_STATUS msg=audit(1523312831.378:24514): selinux=0 auid=0 ses=1
>> >>
>> >> List both sets of status and old values and add the lsm= field and the
>> >> res= field.
>> >>
>> >> Here is the new format:
>> >> type=MAC_STATUS msg=audit(1523293828.657:891): enforcing=0 old_enforcing=1 auid=0 ses=1 enabled=1 old-enabled=1 lsm=selinux res=1
>> >>
>> >> This record already accompanied a SYSCALL record.
>> >>
>> >> See: https://github.com/linux-audit/audit-kernel/issues/46
>> >> Signed-off-by: Richard Guy Briggs <[email protected]>
>> >> ---
>> >> security/selinux/selinuxfs.c | 11 +++++++----
>> >> 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>> >>
>> >> diff --git a/security/selinux/selinuxfs.c b/security/selinux/selinuxfs.c
>> >> index 00eed84..00b21b2 100644
>> >> --- a/security/selinux/selinuxfs.c
>> >> +++ b/security/selinux/selinuxfs.c
>> >> @@ -145,10 +145,11 @@ static ssize_t sel_write_enforce(struct file *file, const char __user *buf,
>> >> if (length)
>> >> goto out;
>> >> audit_log(current->audit_context, GFP_KERNEL, AUDIT_MAC_STATUS,
>> >> - "enforcing=%d old_enforcing=%d auid=%u ses=%u",
>> >> + "enforcing=%d old_enforcing=%d auid=%u ses=%u"
>> >> + " enabled=%d old-enabled=%d lsm=selinux res=1",
>> >> new_value, selinux_enforcing,
>> >> from_kuid(&init_user_ns, audit_get_loginuid(current)),
>> >> - audit_get_sessionid(current));
>> >> + audit_get_sessionid(current), selinux_enabled, selinux_enabled);
>> >
>> > This looks fine.
>> >
>> >> selinux_enforcing = new_value;
>> >> if (selinux_enforcing)
>> >> avc_ss_reset(0);
>> >> @@ -272,9 +273,11 @@ static ssize_t sel_write_disable(struct file *file, const char __user *buf,
>> >> if (length)
>> >> goto out;
>> >> audit_log(current->audit_context, GFP_KERNEL, AUDIT_MAC_STATUS,
>> >> - "selinux=0 auid=%u ses=%u",
>> >> + "enforcing=%d old_enforcing=%d auid=%u ses=%u"
>> >> + " enabled=%d old-enabled=%d lsm=selinux res=1",
>> >> + selinux_enforcing, selinux_enforcing,
>> >> from_kuid(&init_user_ns, audit_get_loginuid(current)),
>> >> - audit_get_sessionid(current));
>> >> + audit_get_sessionid(current), 0, 1);
>> >
>> > It needs to be said again that I'm opposed to changes like this:
>> > inserting new fields, removing fields, or otherwise changing the
>> > format in ways that aren't strictly the addition of new fields to the
>> > end of a record is a Bad Thing. However, there are exceptions (there
>> > are *always* exceptions), and this seems like a reasonable change that
>> > shouldn't negatively affect anyone.
>> >
>> > I'll merge this once the merge window comes to a close (we are going
>> > to need to base selinux/next on v4.17-rc1).
>>
>> Merged into selinux/next, although I should mention that there were
>> some actual code changes because of the SELinux state consolidation
>> patches that went into v4.17. The changes were small but please take
>> a look and make sure everything still looks okay to you.
>
> Ok, that was a bit disruptive, but looks ok to me.
Yes, it was a pretty big change, but it sets the stage for a few
things we are trying to do with SELinux.
Regardless, thanks for giving the merge a quick look.
--
paul moore
http://www.paul-moore.com