Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Date:   Fri, 19 Feb 2021 01:26:51 -0500
From:   Richard Guy Briggs <rgb@redhat.com>
To:     Florian Westphal <fw@strlen.de>
Cc:     Phil Sutter <phil@nwl.cc>, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Linux-Audit Mailing List <linux-audit@redhat.com>,
        netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org, twoerner@redhat.com,
        Eric Paris <eparis@parisplace.org>, tgraf@infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH ghak124 v3] audit: log nftables configuration change
 events
Message-ID: <20210219062651.GR2015948@madcap2.tricolour.ca>
References: <20210211151606.GX3158@orbyte.nwl.cc>
 <CAHC9VhTNQW9d=8GCW-70vAEMh8-LXviP+JHFC2-YkuitokLLMQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <20210211202628.GP2015948@madcap2.tricolour.ca>
 <20210211220930.GC2766@breakpoint.cc>
 <20210217234131.GN3141668@madcap2.tricolour.ca>
 <20210218082207.GJ2766@breakpoint.cc>
 <20210218124211.GO3141668@madcap2.tricolour.ca>
 <20210218125248.GB22944@breakpoint.cc>
 <20210218212001.GQ3141668@madcap2.tricolour.ca>
 <20210218224200.GF22944@breakpoint.cc>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20210218224200.GF22944@breakpoint.cc>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13)
Precedence: bulk

On 2021-02-18 23:42, Florian Westphal wrote:
> Richard Guy Briggs <rgb@redhat.com> wrote:
> > > If they appear in a batch tehy will be ignored, if the batch consists of
> > > such non-modifying ops only then nf_tables_commit() returns early
> > > because the transaction list is empty (nothing to do/change).
> > 
> > Ok, one little inconvenient question: what about GETOBJ_RESET?  That
> > looks like a hybrid that modifies kernel table counters and reports
> > synchronously.  That could be a special case call in
> > nf_tables_dump_obj() and nf_tables_getobj().  Will that cause a storm
> > per commit?
> 
> No, since they can't be part of a commit (they don't implement the
> 'call_batch' function).

Ok, good, so they should be safe (but still needs the gfp param to
audit_log_nfcfg() for atomic alloc in that obj reset callback).

> I'm not sure GETOBJ_RESET should be reported in the first place:
> RESET only affects expr internal state, and that state changes all the time
> anyway in response to network traffic.

We report audit lost messages reset as a config change since it affects
the view that an admin has about a system.  An unaccounted for reset
could mislead an administrator into thinking things are alright when
some messages were lost and there was nothing to show for it.  I could
see similar situations with network entity counters.

- RGB

--
Richard Guy Briggs <rgb@redhat.com>
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