Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v4 3/5] ima: differentiate auditing policy rules
 from "audit" actions
From:   Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To:     Stefan Berger <stefanb@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org,
        containers@lists.linux-foundation.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org
Cc:     serge@hallyn.com, sunyuqiong1988@gmail.com, david.safford@ge.com,
        mkayaalp@cs.binghamton.edu, James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com,
        ebiederm@xmission.com, john.johansen@canonical.com,
        Richard Guy Briggs <rgb@redhat.com>,
        Steve Grubb <sgrubb@redhat.com>
Date:   Wed, 16 May 2018 17:40:31 -0400
In-Reply-To: <2496f165-67f7-304d-08a0-ea8eedd3c3d4@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
References: <20180511144230.75384-1-stefanb@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
         <20180511144230.75384-4-stefanb@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
         <1526391655.3937.151.camel@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
         <2496f165-67f7-304d-08a0-ea8eedd3c3d4@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Message-Id: <1526506831.3254.13.camel@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Wed, 2018-05-16 at 16:28 -0400, Stefan Berger wrote:
> On 05/15/2018 09:40 AM, Mimi Zohar wrote:
> > Hi Stefan,
> >
> > On Fri, 2018-05-11 at 10:42 -0400, Stefan Berger wrote:
> >> From: Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> >>
> >> The AUDIT_INTEGRITY_RULE is used for auditing IMA policy rules and
> >> the IMA "audit" policy action.  This patch defines AUDIT_INTEGRITY_POLICY
> >> to reflect the IMA policy rules.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> > We do need to separate out auditing the IMA policy rules from the
> > "IMA-audit" messages.  Based on the IMA policy rule aspect of the
> > discussions [1],  I would really appreciate if you could work with
> > Richard and Steve on the new IMA policy rule audit format.

> Is your patch below still valid for splitting it up into 'two distinct 
> audit record types' ?

We need to separate the IMA policy audit rules from the IMA-audit
messages.  As we're changing the audit numbers, we need to take into
account Richard's and Steve's comments about the IMA policy record
format at the same time.

This patch is incomplete and needs to address their comments.

Mimi

> >
> > This change can be upstreamed independently of either the IMA
> > namespacing or the audit containerid patch sets.  The sooner we make
> > this change and upstream it, the better.
> >
> > [1] https://www.redhat.com/archives/linux-audit/2018-March/msg00092.html
> >
> > thanks,
> >
> > Mimi
> >
> >> ---
> >>   include/uapi/linux/audit.h          | 3 ++-
> >>   security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c | 2 +-
> >>   2 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/include/uapi/linux/audit.h b/include/uapi/linux/audit.h
> >> index 4e61a9e05132..8966e7ff1c4c 100644
> >> --- a/include/uapi/linux/audit.h
> >> +++ b/include/uapi/linux/audit.h
> >> @@ -146,7 +146,8 @@
> >>   #define AUDIT_INTEGRITY_STATUS	    1802 /* Integrity enable status */
> >>   #define AUDIT_INTEGRITY_HASH	    1803 /* Integrity HASH type */
> >>   #define AUDIT_INTEGRITY_PCR	    1804 /* PCR invalidation msgs */
> >> -#define AUDIT_INTEGRITY_RULE	    1805 /* policy rule */
> >> +#define AUDIT_INTEGRITY_RULE	    1805 /* IMA "audit" action policy msgs  */
> >> +#define AUDIT_INTEGRITY_POLICY	    1806 /* IMA policy rules */
> >>
> >>   #define AUDIT_KERNEL		2000	/* Asynchronous audit record. NOT A REQUEST. */
> >>
> >> diff --git a/security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c b/security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c
> >> index 915f5572c6ff..3a1412db02a3 100644
> >> --- a/security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c
> >> +++ b/security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c
> >> @@ -619,7 +619,7 @@ static int ima_parse_rule(char *rule, struct ima_rule_entry *entry)
> >>   	bool uid_token;
> >>   	int result = 0;
> >>
> >> -	ab = audit_log_start(NULL, GFP_KERNEL, AUDIT_INTEGRITY_RULE);
> >> +	ab = audit_log_start(NULL, GFP_KERNEL, AUDIT_INTEGRITY_POLICY);
> >>
> >>   	entry->uid = INVALID_UID;
> >>   	entry->fowner = INVALID_UID;
> 
>