All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Steve Grubb <sgrubb@redhat.com>
To: linux-audit@redhat.com
Cc: Casey Schaufler <casey@schaufler-ca.com>,
	Tyler Hicks <tyhicks@canonical.com>,
	linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org,
	apparmor <apparmor@lists.ubuntu.com>
Subject: Re: Unique audit record type ranges for individual LSMs
Date: Mon, 11 Dec 2017 10:44:22 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <9007498.tkJPu7STvn@x2> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <3ea79b60-21cb-5638-304d-97bde8b12b5c@schaufler-ca.com>

On Wednesday, December 6, 2017 1:47:43 PM EST Casey Schaufler wrote:
> > While it will be potentially painful to switch, the AppArmor project is
> > considering to use a unique range in order for audit-userspace to
> > support AppArmor audit records. IMHO, SMACK would be free to continue
> > using 1400-1499 as long as they don't need audit-userspace support and
> > SELinux would continue using 1400-1499.
> 
> Aside from the comment that says 1400-1499 are for SELinux, and the three
> events (1400-1402) that are SELinux specific, the events really are general.
> Why not add the AppArmor specifics to the 1400 range? Give them a generic
> sounding name and you'll achieve consistency. Change the comment to say
> "Security Module use" instead of "SELinux use".

I really don't know what the status is for user space support on the other 
LSMs. I couldn't tell you if the searching/reporting are broken or working 
just fine.

Additionally, there is auditctl which has very selinux specific field options 
to audit on a variety of pieces of the labels. Does this make sense for other 
LSMs? Do other LSMs have different needs? I really have no idea.

But one thing for sure...if we combine them all, I expect patches are needed 
for user space. By separating them out by event number or some identifier like 
lsm=, then we can have lsm specific fixups if necessary.

-Steve

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: sgrubb@redhat.com (Steve Grubb)
To: linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Unique audit record type ranges for individual LSMs
Date: Mon, 11 Dec 2017 10:44:22 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <9007498.tkJPu7STvn@x2> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <3ea79b60-21cb-5638-304d-97bde8b12b5c@schaufler-ca.com>

On Wednesday, December 6, 2017 1:47:43 PM EST Casey Schaufler wrote:
> > While it will be potentially painful to switch, the AppArmor project is
> > considering to use a unique range in order for audit-userspace to
> > support AppArmor audit records. IMHO, SMACK would be free to continue
> > using 1400-1499 as long as they don't need audit-userspace support and
> > SELinux would continue using 1400-1499.
> 
> Aside from the comment that says 1400-1499 are for SELinux, and the three
> events (1400-1402) that are SELinux specific, the events really are general.
> Why not add the AppArmor specifics to the 1400 range? Give them a generic
> sounding name and you'll achieve consistency. Change the comment to say
> "Security Module use" instead of "SELinux use".

I really don't know what the status is for user space support on the other 
LSMs. I couldn't tell you if the searching/reporting are broken or working 
just fine.

Additionally, there is auditctl which has very selinux specific field options 
to audit on a variety of pieces of the labels. Does this make sense for other 
LSMs? Do other LSMs have different needs? I really have no idea.

But one thing for sure...if we combine them all, I expect patches are needed 
for user space. By separating them out by event number or some identifier like 
lsm=, then we can have lsm specific fixups if necessary.

-Steve
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-security-module" in
the body of a message to majordomo at vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

  parent reply	other threads:[~2017-12-11 15:44 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-12-06 17:51 Unique audit record type ranges for individual LSMs Tyler Hicks
2017-12-06 18:47 ` Casey Schaufler
2017-12-06 18:47   ` Casey Schaufler
2017-12-06 19:12   ` Tyler Hicks
2017-12-11 15:44   ` Steve Grubb [this message]
2017-12-11 15:44     ` Steve Grubb
2017-12-11 20:56     ` Casey Schaufler
2017-12-11 20:56       ` Casey Schaufler
2017-12-12  3:42       ` Steve Grubb
2017-12-12  3:42         ` Steve Grubb
2017-12-11 15:35 ` Steve Grubb
2017-12-11 15:35   ` Steve Grubb
2017-12-18 10:28 ` Laurent Bigonville

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=9007498.tkJPu7STvn@x2 \
    --to=sgrubb@redhat.com \
    --cc=apparmor@lists.ubuntu.com \
    --cc=casey@schaufler-ca.com \
    --cc=linux-audit@redhat.com \
    --cc=linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=tyhicks@canonical.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.