From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Steve Grubb Subject: Re: audit 1.2.2 released Date: Tue, 16 May 2006 11:23:14 -0400 Message-ID: <200605161123.14242.sgrubb@redhat.com> References: <200605121726.32952.sgrubb@redhat.com> <4468E115.40107@us.ibm.com> <4469E753.3070206@us.ibm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <4469E753.3070206@us.ibm.com> Content-Disposition: inline List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: linux-audit-bounces@redhat.com Errors-To: linux-audit-bounces@redhat.com To: Michael C Thompson Cc: Linux Audit List-Id: linux-audit@redhat.com On Tuesday 16 May 2006 10:53, Michael C Thompson wrote: > I've "enchanced" this transcript with strace output (selective) and the > return code of the selinux_socket_recvmsg call. > > > # auditctl -l > > sendto(3, "\20\0\0\0\365\3\5\0\1\0\0\0\0\0\0\0", 16, 0, > {sa_family=AF_NETLINK, pid=0, groups=00000000}, 12) = 16 > poll([{fd=3, events=POLLIN, revents=POLLIN}], 1, 100) = 1 > recvfrom(3, "$\0\0\0\2\0\0\0\1\0\0\0\322\7\0\0\377\377\377\377\20\0"..., > 8476, MSG_PEEK|MSG_DONTWAIT, {sa_family=AF_NETLINK, pid=0, > groups=00000000}, [12]) = 36 > -> selinux_sock_recvmsg returns 0 > > recvfrom(3, "$\0\0\0\2\0\0\0\1\0\0\0\322\7\0\0\377\377\377\377\20\0"..., > 8476, MSG_DONTWAIT, {sa_family=AF_NETLINK, pid=0, groups=00000000}, > [12]) = 36 > -> selinux_sock_recvmsg returns 0 This return code says -EPERM. > > # auditctl -l > > sendto(3, "\20\0\0\0\365\3\5\0\1\0\0\0\0\0\0\0", 16, 0, > {sa_family=AF_NETLINK, pid=0, groups=00000000}, 12) = 16 > poll([{fd=3, events=POLLIN, revents=POLLIN}], 1, 100) = 1 > > recvfrom(3, "$\0\0\0\2\0\0\0\1\0\0\0\326\7\0\0\0\0\0\0\20\0\0\0\365"..., > 8476, MSG_PEEK|MSG_DONTWAIT, {sa_family=AF_NETLINK, pid=0, > groups=00000000}, [12]) = 36 > -> selinux_sock_recvmsg returns 0 This return code shows the kernel has data. > I do not know enough of about the auditctl code, but to me this looks > like auditctl is failing to issue the 3rd recvfrom syscall. When it gets the answer, EPERM, there's no need to do anything else cause the kernel rejected the request. -Steve