From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.3 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7B758C2D0E4 for ; Fri, 20 Nov 2020 19:45:59 +0000 (UTC) Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [216.205.24.124]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9E7722240A for ; Fri, 20 Nov 2020 19:45:58 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 9E7722240A Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=tlinx.org Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=tempfail smtp.mailfrom=linux-audit-bounces@redhat.com Received: from mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (mimecast-mx01.redhat.com [209.132.183.4]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-493-I-LN6iaBNa6qVazpyIcM2g-1; Fri, 20 Nov 2020 14:45:54 -0500 X-MC-Unique: I-LN6iaBNa6qVazpyIcM2g-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx03.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.13]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 60A6210766B9; Fri, 20 Nov 2020 19:45:51 +0000 (UTC) Received: from colo-mx.corp.redhat.com (colo-mx01.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.20]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 90FC060853; Fri, 20 Nov 2020 19:45:50 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists01.pubmisc.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com (lists01.pubmisc.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.19.33]) by colo-mx.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 16E5E180954D; Fri, 20 Nov 2020 19:45:44 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx06.intmail.prod.int.rdu2.redhat.com [10.11.54.6]) by lists01.pubmisc.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id 0AKJjhNZ024277 for ; Fri, 20 Nov 2020 14:45:43 -0500 Received: by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) id 1AB402166B2B; Fri, 20 Nov 2020 19:45:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mimecast-mx02.redhat.com (mimecast06.extmail.prod.ext.rdu2.redhat.com [10.11.55.22]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 162B72166B28 for ; Fri, 20 Nov 2020 19:45:40 +0000 (UTC) Received: from us-smtp-1.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-1.mimecast.com [207.211.31.120]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx02.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B886B1871BF4 for ; Fri, 20 Nov 2020 19:45:40 +0000 (UTC) Received: from Ishtar.sc.tlinx.org (ishtar.tlinx.org [173.164.175.65]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-347-VwW__xFeOj6W42lfAS37Ww-1; Fri, 20 Nov 2020 14:45:38 -0500 X-MC-Unique: VwW__xFeOj6W42lfAS37Ww-1 Received: from [192.168.3.12] (Athenae [192.168.3.12]) by Ishtar.sc.tlinx.org (8.14.7/8.14.4/SuSE Linux 0.8) with ESMTP id 0AKJi00j068302 for ; Fri, 20 Nov 2020 11:44:03 -0800 Message-ID: <5FB81CBD.7040500@tlinx.org> Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2020 11:45:01 -0800 From: "L. A. Walsh" User-Agent: Thunderbird MIME-Version: 1.0 To: linux-audit@redhat.com Subject: Identifying thread/process termination X-Mimecast-Impersonation-Protect: Policy=CLT - Impersonation Protection Definition; Similar Internal Domain=false; Similar Monitored External Domain=false; Custom External Domain=false; Mimecast External Domain=false; Newly Observed Domain=false; Internal User Name=false; Custom Display Name List=false; Reply-to Address Mismatch=false; Targeted Threat Dictionary=false; Mimecast Threat Dictionary=false; Custom Threat Dictionary=false X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.78 on 10.11.54.6 X-loop: linux-audit@redhat.com X-BeenThere: linux-audit@redhat.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: junk List-Id: Linux Audit Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: linux-audit-bounces@redhat.com Errors-To: linux-audit-bounces@redhat.com X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.79 on 10.5.11.13 Authentication-Results: relay.mimecast.com; auth=pass smtp.auth=CUSA124A263 smtp.mailfrom=linux-audit-bounces@redhat.com X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed" On 2020/11/16 05:43, Paul Moore wrote: > The most important thing to keep in mind is that all of the threads > inside a process share the same memory space. It is the lack of a > strong, enforceable boundary between threads which makes it difficult, > if not impossible, to view threads as individual entities from a > security perspective. --- Depends on how much your security policy relies on recognizing abnormal behavior. If a program splits function across well defined areas by a named thread, one may develop a baseline of "normal" functionality associated with given threads. Determining that a thread is operating outside it's normal range can allow for a earlier detection and better monitoring of "safe" and/or secure operation. How programs operate, especially in regards to what work is normal for a given thread can only be done with thread level monitoring. While given threads _can_ access global-user memory, that involves how they are coded or programmed to run. That, in turn, can be used to help define boundaries and integrity levels of various processes in a system. For example, even though a logging thread might gather data from other threads, knowing that it can only write to output to specific configured destinations would allow swift detection of aberrations. -- Linux-audit mailing list Linux-audit@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-audit