Re: [PATCH] Fix acct quoting in audit_log_acct_message())

Steve Grubb
2008-03-04T22:14:05Z

On Tuesday 04 March 2008 16:55:20 Eric Paris wrote:
> but we both agree auparse doesn't get them all (for better or worse) and
> 2.6.24 only adds new stuff, it doesn't remove?

Right.

> > Of these, A0-4 is probably from the execve patch. I have no idea what the
> > status of this patch is and if its upstream. I've not seen the records so
> > this would be something very new.
>
> execve could always turn A0-infinity into hex.

That's with a capital A0? Lower case a0 is numeric data in the syscalls and
might be a name collision.

> > data, I need to go hunt this down. I don't like the name so it will
> > probably need to change in the kernel
>
> maybe audit tty stuff? I don't see it in auditsc.c or audit.c (just a
> guess)

Could be. Whatever it is, its new and need integration. The name data sounds
too generic though. Its got to be something more meaningful than data.

> > msg, name collision it has to change wherever it is in the kernel
>
> not sure what this means... I only see msg used in one place, but it is
> a great example of non-standardization which should be cleaned up....
>
> if (msg_type != AUDIT_USER_TTY)
> audit_log_format(ab, " msg='%.1024s'",
> (char *)data);
> else {
> int size;
>
> audit_log_format(ab, " msg=");
> size = nlmsg_len(nlh);
> audit_log_n_untrustedstring(ab, size,
> data);
> }

huh? That is new and doesn't seem right.

> The top case will surround these with '' which the bottom will surround
> with ""

Yes, that has got to change. msg=has only one use and its the way it used to
be.

> > new, old, these sound like bugs. They need to get fixed in the kernel
>
> new and old are from audit config changes.

We probably need a '-' added or a couple words rearranged. I need to hunt
those down to see which way they should go.

> Am i really expected to trust what came down the netlink socket from
> userspace was sane?

That's not the issue to me, new and old are simply non-descriptive. New and
old what?

> > file & watch are probably legacy from RHEL4 I think. It can probably be
> > deleted.
>
> dont see them in my kernels

That's what I thought.

Thanks,
-Steve