Received: by 2002:a25:5b86:0:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id p128csp915595ybb; Thu, 28 Mar 2019 15:01:35 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqyFlqTc/DzP4wXRNDzjR8AnkvbrDhxa1hcU1joMd6TbiKo2CZF23qq2MMMiRx1C1VS0QqnZ X-Received: by 2002:a65:610a:: with SMTP id z10mr10739776pgu.23.1553810494980; Thu, 28 Mar 2019 15:01:34 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1553810494; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=aBL28MkwfxIbpMAgNLX46SDsvbBE+WcV/YQdHQ4wXRLyomUMlkLt3HS9mgpC9qofcV EfvrgxlXZ4c/vckpfBCz0s2JFQzvP5FRrh0SgytOLOhXh5BZPKX1DSVPS9gK9qPaU9AA Vy4Dl0r2MOAUePF0hA4tWxViO+To5qfc+1W4U8/qqM26dGcw6031Hjk57ik2nSO1ryg+ gvkz+OBV4vb2nnXot6zdt3P1IPN7ePtdiBtBVr07VsAid/r9MJrzVNZj/M+2c2vwbxKB zGtHFndNbmqix5nFDm1UD7PM4GV71nokfYI7R5QOVzswkOfp0k2dYjPgqCdVcsFDTQ9P 0+Yg== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from :in-reply-to:references:mime-version:dkim-signature; bh=ydwqILf+lzcgNiOhfVooHaxoKMfjMG8RcB/4lBwPLkA=; b=ghNn8tCohDT3zUUbrwtSe7qFlPEfGSvPFIUojypQBw8mQJiWEhz6p7O1U50Ps8RJbE MCQd0v5Cp46/DZRa8v3uhTQ8nhLdYGDVDFgR/n+AuPm4VS70WbY5W1/g0JrQSzuSUvwB 1d6OKH09uaoSVjnIjWW/mxql8U/cpS0R52pHlFgEuCzOs8WCh4uxfXQkfsOwFyIFekoP /81Vn6+jW8G/WeTRADjq6zN5hv9IWtXw8hAbbekRbNcLC/zVq2E1vRV8MfOPcxbbnTlh N42OMlMVPiaI/o20LRYHvPsfZEXZ48X/2pfMVDO+OvJbvQfhLtZW2vogLb8biw1wcjti szGw== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@paul-moore-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com header.s=20150623 header.b=uO0zwFg1; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [209.132.180.67]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id p8si223858plq.225.2019.03.28.15.01.19; Thu, 28 Mar 2019 15:01:34 -0700 (PDT) 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; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@paul-moore-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com header.s=20150623 header.b=uO0zwFg1; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1728065AbfC1WAf (ORCPT + 99 others); Thu, 28 Mar 2019 18:00:35 -0400 Received: from mail-lj1-f195.google.com ([209.85.208.195]:43695 "EHLO mail-lj1-f195.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1728009AbfC1WAf (ORCPT ); Thu, 28 Mar 2019 18:00:35 -0400 Received: by mail-lj1-f195.google.com with SMTP id f18so178962lja.10 for ; Thu, 28 Mar 2019 15:00:33 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=paul-moore-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=ydwqILf+lzcgNiOhfVooHaxoKMfjMG8RcB/4lBwPLkA=; b=uO0zwFg1gSIla5jytxwzZTQbLiu9J8tvNhcGYH9n1RIWUWmsTPdj29lsqZbhhCD3rq ryKYS2UriTUQS7d5Cpl7UKHsjUSV+HQDG8moWqK6NT+yYmf1SKbKEcR0oU6iE9dSHcFQ 6na/nDSR9MnIxYtH4nq9Tyt3j+IZilJ6mYxoXdJTjC7c2ZRZiH1ox0H2xeuh9nQEyY02 dTEnO3RHcyy97vM3Qh2K3c7DJeZlx1aOnKB/HMpzaJkgEsJE0hxxAFBa4SirqnuD2dyD mytYIafIa1ykpkbDY/26h58cwgNBreE437K8CfHmzWkfI5afyYoUsZ//eAbjaYb8d2I1 RtwQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=ydwqILf+lzcgNiOhfVooHaxoKMfjMG8RcB/4lBwPLkA=; b=cl/HksZojFIrH/jCP8bIEimL6V2IBVJ1ykPqJtDF1cv0JcBuHDymkAmGezH3UitCFF OwDsSqUU1RiFscdjXre/lK3fIVnFcgQxuX+Mi+8bO43yy+4E6/SPSm6kmPs100MeOYnq pfG11iSBcjXI6ormQr3YvYcqPW6MDj0ETJ6dSRpQefjtyXDTqPbK+uVJL02tUEVoiGhl Uwt+rCQzszB86sh0kLglFMMmsaZXQC3yEe6KJmzCNObT3NXtFdDwyook9OPqY1putLt/ +hao00ek20692OXQkmj7F1P0pD1DoSPGKGzMtbaHykFbKgzf7jfHENBtI4Wa9HBVLERm 7HWQ== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAVmqpNKNdo3jgwrOi9LGzG5GVpRx1zkBOfkUsRAipKbEOUQBn6t kAZCpqBaHArGtsZO+5qE2WlkndWrgn5yWa/Ta4pF X-Received: by 2002:a2e:1510:: with SMTP id s16mr9542663ljd.196.1553810432805; Thu, 28 Mar 2019 15:00:32 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <27473c84a274c64871cfa8e3636deaf05603c978.1552665316.git.rgb@redhat.com> <20190328011202.6raixwzdimn5b4zk@madcap2.tricolour.ca> <20190328214023.qpszfvxbrjlldmmt@madcap2.tricolour.ca> In-Reply-To: <20190328214023.qpszfvxbrjlldmmt@madcap2.tricolour.ca> From: Paul Moore Date: Thu, 28 Mar 2019 18:00:21 -0400 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH ghak90 V5 09/10] audit: add support for containerid to network namespaces To: Richard Guy Briggs Cc: Ondrej Mosnacek , nhorman@tuxdriver.com, linux-api@vger.kernel.org, containers@lists.linux-foundation.org, LKML , David Howells , Linux-Audit Mailing List , netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org, "Eric W . Biederman" , Simo Sorce , netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, Eric Paris , "Serge E. Hallyn" Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Mar 28, 2019 at 5:40 PM Richard Guy Briggs wrote: > On 2019-03-28 11:46, Paul Moore wrote: > > On Wed, Mar 27, 2019 at 9:12 PM Richard Guy Briggs wrote: > > > > > > On 2019-03-27 23:42, Ondrej Mosnacek wrote: > > > > On Fri, Mar 15, 2019 at 7:35 PM Richard Guy Briggs wrote: > > > > > Audit events could happen in a network namespace outside of a task > > > > > context due to packets received from the net that trigger an auditing > > > > > rule prior to being associated with a running task. The network > > > > > namespace could be in use by multiple containers by association to the > > > > > tasks in that network namespace. We still want a way to attribute > > > > > these events to any potential containers. Keep a list per network > > > > > namespace to track these audit container identifiiers. > > > > > > > > > > Add/increment the audit container identifier on: > > > > > - initial setting of the audit container identifier via /proc > > > > > - clone/fork call that inherits an audit container identifier > > > > > - unshare call that inherits an audit container identifier > > > > > - setns call that inherits an audit container identifier > > > > > Delete/decrement the audit container identifier on: > > > > > - an inherited audit container identifier dropped when child set > > > > > - process exit > > > > > - unshare call that drops a net namespace > > > > > - setns call that drops a net namespace > > > > > > > > > > See: https://github.com/linux-audit/audit-kernel/issues/92 > > > > > See: https://github.com/linux-audit/audit-testsuite/issues/64 > > > > > See: https://github.com/linux-audit/audit-kernel/wiki/RFE-Audit-Container-ID > > > > > Signed-off-by: Richard Guy Briggs > > > > > --- > > > > > include/linux/audit.h | 19 ++++++++++++ > > > > > kernel/audit.c | 86 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-- > > > > > kernel/nsproxy.c | 4 +++ > > > > > 3 files changed, 106 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > > > > > > > > > diff --git a/include/linux/audit.h b/include/linux/audit.h > > > > > index fa19fa408931..70255c2dfb9f 100644 > > > > > --- a/include/linux/audit.h > > > > > +++ b/include/linux/audit.h > > > > > @@ -27,6 +27,7 @@ > > > > > #include > > > > > #include /* LOOKUP_* */ > > > > > #include > > > > > +#include > > > > > > > > > > #define AUDIT_INO_UNSET ((unsigned long)-1) > > > > > #define AUDIT_DEV_UNSET ((dev_t)-1) > > > > > @@ -99,6 +100,13 @@ struct audit_task_info { > > > > > > > > > > extern struct audit_task_info init_struct_audit; > > > > > > > > > > +struct audit_contid { > > > > > + struct list_head list; > > > > > + u64 id; > > > > > + refcount_t refcount; > > > > > > > > Hm, since we only ever touch the refcount under a spinlock, I wonder > > > > if we could just make it a regular unsigned int (we don't need the > > > > atomicity guarantees). OTOH, refcount_t comes with some extra overflow > > > > checking, so it's probably better to leave it as is... > > > > > > Since the update is done using rcu-safe methods, do we even need the > > > spin_lock? Neil? Paul? > > > > As discussed, the refcount field is protected against simultaneous > > writes by the spinlock that protects additions/removals from the list > > as a whole so I don't believe the refcount_t atomicity is critical in > > this regard. > > > > Where it gets tricky, and I can't say I'm 100% confident on my answer > > here, is if refcount was a regular int and we wanted to access it > > outside of a spinlock (to be clear, it doesn't look like this patch > > currently does this). With RCU, if refcount was a regular int > > (unsigned or otherwise), I believe it would be possible for different > > threads of execution to potentially see different values of refcount > > (assuming one thread was adding/removing from the list). Using a > > refcount_t would protect against this, alternatively, taking the > > spinlock should also protect against this. > > Ok, from the above it isn't clear to me if you are happy with the > current code or would prefer any changes, or from below that you still > need to work it through to make a pronouncement. It sounds to me you > would be ok with *either* spinlock *or* refcount_t, but don't see the > need for both. To be fair you didn't ask if I was "happy" with the approach above, you asked if we needed the spinlock/refcount_t. I believe I answered that question as comprehensively as I could, but perhaps you wanted a hard yes or no? In that case, since refcount_t is obviously safer, I would stick with that for now just to limit the number of possible failures. If someone smarter than you or I comes along and definitively says you are 100% safe to use an int, then go ahead and use an int. Beyond that, I'm still in the process of reviewing your patches, but I haven't finished yet, so no "pronouncement" or whatever you want to call it. -- paul moore www.paul-moore.com