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;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <cover.1577736799.git.rgb@redhat.com> <3665686.i1MIc9PeWa@x2>
 <CAHC9VhRHfjuv5yyn+nQ2LbHtcezBcjKtOQ69ssYrXOiExuCjBw@mail.gmail.com> <35934535.C1y6eIYgqz@x2>
In-Reply-To: <35934535.C1y6eIYgqz@x2>
From:   Paul Moore <paul@paul-moore.com>
Date:   Wed, 5 Feb 2020 17:57:55 -0500
Message-ID: <CAHC9VhQnNUM8XQpFykx_Rg0zNLCaCWDo=HSY3RPhN3ft-RpyHw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH ghak90 V8 13/16] audit: track container nesting
To:     Steve Grubb <sgrubb@redhat.com>
Cc:     Richard Guy Briggs <rgb@redhat.com>,
        containers@lists.linux-foundation.org, linux-api@vger.kernel.org,
        Linux-Audit Mailing List <linux-audit@redhat.com>,
        linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        netdev@vger.kernel.org, netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org,
        omosnace@redhat.com, dhowells@redhat.com, simo@redhat.com,
        Eric Paris <eparis@parisplace.org>,
        Serge Hallyn <serge@hallyn.com>, ebiederm@xmission.com,
        nhorman@tuxdriver.com, Dan Walsh <dwalsh@redhat.com>,
        mpatel@redhat.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, Feb 4, 2020 at 1:12 PM Steve Grubb <sgrubb@redhat.com> wrote:
> On Tuesday, February 4, 2020 10:52:36 AM EST Paul Moore wrote:
> > On Tue, Feb 4, 2020 at 10:47 AM Steve Grubb <sgrubb@redhat.com> wrote:
> > > On Tuesday, February 4, 2020 8:19:44 AM EST Richard Guy Briggs wrote:
> > > > > The established pattern is that we print -1 when its unset and "?"
> > > > > when
> > > > > its totalling missing. So, how could this be invalid? It should be
> > > > > set
> > > > > or not. That is unless its totally missing just like when we do not
> > > > > run
> > > > > with selinux enabled and a context just doesn't exist.
> > > >
> > > > Ok, so in this case it is clearly unset, so should be -1, which will be
> > > > a
> > > > 20-digit number when represented as an unsigned long long int.
> > > >
> > > > Thank you for that clarification Steve.
> > >
> > > It is literally a  -1.  ( 2 characters)
> >
> > Well, not as Richard has currently written the code, it is a "%llu".
> > This was why I asked the question I did; if we want the "-1" here we
> > probably want to special case that as I don't think we want to display
> > audit container IDs as signed numbers in general.
>
> OK, then go with the long number, we'll fix it in the interpretation. I guess
> we do the same thing for auid.

As I said above, I'm okay with a special case handling for unset/"-1"
in this case.

-- 
paul moore
www.paul-moore.com