type for 3rd party events

type for 3rd party events

[Steve Grubb]

Hi,

There is a request for a message type to be allocated allowing 3rd party 
kernel modules the ability to send audit events. This would be similar to the 
AUDIT_TRUSTED_APP type allocated for user space apps. I'm undecided about a 
name and could use some suggestions.  My only thoughts right now are  
AUDIT_KERNEL_MODULE. Anyone have a better type name for 3rd party use?

Thanks,
-Steve

Re: type for 3rd party events

[Linda Knippers]

Steve Grubb wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> There is a request for a message type to be allocated allowing 3rd party 
> kernel modules the ability to send audit events. This would be similar to the 
> AUDIT_TRUSTED_APP type allocated for user space apps. I'm undecided about a 
> name and could use some suggestions.  My only thoughts right now are  
> AUDIT_KERNEL_MODULE. Anyone have a better type name for 3rd party use?

I'll throw some out...wouldn't necessarily call them better.

AUDIT_GENERIC_MODULE
AUDIT_MISC_KERN_MODULE
AUDIT_3RD_PARTY_MODULE

-- ljk

Re: type for 3rd party events

[Steve Grubb]

On Monday 25 September 2006 11:22, Linda Knippers wrote:
> I'll throw some out...wouldn't necessarily call them better.
> AUDIT_MISC_KERN_MODULE

Maybe something like AUDIT_KERNEL_MISC  ?

-Steve

Re: type for 3rd party events

[Linda Knippers]

Steve Grubb wrote:
> On Monday 25 September 2006 11:22, Linda Knippers wrote:
> 
>>I'll throw some out...wouldn't necessarily call them better.
>>AUDIT_MISC_KERN_MODULE
> 
> 
> Maybe something like AUDIT_KERNEL_MISC  ?

That sounds like to can come from anywhere in the kernel vs just 3rd
party modules.  Maybe AUDIT_KERNEL_MISC_MOD?

I don't have much of an opinion here.  Just trying to be helpful. :-)

-- ljk

Re: type for 3rd party events

[Valdis.Kletnieks]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 570 bytes --]

On Tue, 26 Sep 2006 11:20:13 EDT, Linda Knippers said:
> Steve Grubb wrote:

> > Maybe something like AUDIT_KERNEL_MISC  ?
> 
> That sounds like to can come from anywhere in the kernel vs just 3rd
> party modules.  Maybe AUDIT_KERNEL_MISC_MOD?

For messages like that, is the fact it's a module at all relevant?
(Consider the case of 3rd party code that's not a module, but builtin,
either via patching or via 'CONFIG_3RDPARTY_FOO=y' rather than =m?)

Separating primary kernel vendor from self-inflicted 3rd party software would
seem to be a more productive division.


[-- Attachment #1.2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 226 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 0 bytes --]