From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: LC Bruzenak Subject: Re: audit rule question Date: Wed, 07 May 2008 13:07:39 -0500 Message-ID: <1210183659.6586.48.camel@homeserver> References: <1210176961.6586.26.camel@homeserver> <200805071244.02163.sgrubb@redhat.com> <1210179397.6586.44.camel@homeserver> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from mx3.redhat.com (mx3.redhat.com [172.16.48.32]) by int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id m47I86kE006263 for ; Wed, 7 May 2008 14:08:06 -0400 Received: from magi (rrcs-24-242-137-197.sw.biz.rr.com [24.242.137.197]) by mx3.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id m47I7tVX010007 for ; Wed, 7 May 2008 14:07:55 -0400 Received: from [24.242.137.194] (helo=[192.168.30.40]) by magi with esmtpsa (TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1Jto2R-0005Wq-P1 for linux-audit@redhat.com; Wed, 07 May 2008 13:06:47 -0500 In-Reply-To: <1210179397.6586.44.camel@homeserver> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: linux-audit-bounces@redhat.com Errors-To: linux-audit-bounces@redhat.com To: Linux Audit List-Id: linux-audit@redhat.com > I am a little surprised that the "-a always,exit" doesn't cause an > error. I wonder if it works correctly - maybe auditctl code is smart > enough to overcome syntactic dyslexia? :) > given rules: -a always,exit -F arch=b32 -S adjtimex -S settimeofday -k time-change -a exit,always -F arch=b64 -S adjtimex -S settimeofday -k time-change [root@hugo ~]# auditctl -l | grep timex LIST_RULES: exit,always arch=1073741827 (0x40000003) key=time-change syscall=settimeofday,adjtimex LIST_RULES: exit,always arch=3221225534 (0xc000003e) key=time-change syscall=adjtimex,settimeofday So it seems the auditctl code is able to get the intent right regardless of the order. LCB. -- LC (Lenny) Bruzenak lenny@magitekltd.com