From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Steve Grubb <sgrubb@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: Format of EXECVE
Date: Mon, 17 Sep 2007 14:07:52 -0400
Message-ID: <200709171407.53515.sgrubb@redhat.com>
References: <1190047816.14088.17.camel@localhost.localdomain>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <linux-audit-bounces@redhat.com>
In-Reply-To: <1190047816.14088.17.camel@localhost.localdomain>
Content-Disposition: inline
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-audit>,
	<mailto:linux-audit-request@redhat.com?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://www.redhat.com/archives/linux-audit>
List-Post: <mailto:linux-audit@redhat.com>
List-Help: <mailto:linux-audit-request@redhat.com?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-audit>,
	<mailto:linux-audit-request@redhat.com?subject=subscribe>
Sender: linux-audit-bounces@redhat.com
Errors-To: linux-audit-bounces@redhat.com
To: linux-audit@redhat.com
List-Id: linux-audit@redhat.com

On Monday 17 September 2007 12:50:16 Matthew Booth wrote:
> Firstly, on RHEL4 U5, I've noticed that if an argument has spaces in it,
> it won't be pretty printed in the EXECVE record. Is that a feature?

Yes. Any field originating in something that a user can alter is escaped when 
one of several characters is found in the field.


> Secondly, I noticed that the sequence of messages is:
> SYSCALL
> EXECVE
> CWD
> PATH
>
> I'm considering expanding argv[0] of EXECVE to be an absolute path.
> However, that would mean either buffering things or moving EXECVE after
> the PATH record. Would that break any contract, or reasonable
> expectations that anyone's aware of?

They come out in the order the kernel creates them. I don't think anything in 
the audit package cares about that ordering. It buffers an event at a time in 
ausearch and aureport.

-Steve