From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Steve Grubb <sgrubb@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: open() syscall and success=0 question
Date: Tue, 13 May 2008 10:24:41 -0400
Message-ID: <200805131024.42025.sgrubb@redhat.com>
References: <20080513141353.GB4939@cisco.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <linux-audit-bounces@redhat.com>
In-Reply-To: <20080513141353.GB4939@cisco.com>
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 Tuesday 13 May 2008 10:13:53 Keith Kaple wrote:
> When open fails, the open() manpage says it will return -1 so that will make
> success false or 0.  When success is false, auditd seems to use the negated
> value of ERRNO to populate the exit= field, is that correct?

This is actually done by the kernel, not auditd. But you are correct.

> So a rule such as:
>
> auditctl -a exit,always -S open -F success=0 -F exit=-13
>
> Would log only permission related failures, correct?

Correct. But that can be reduced to:

auditctl -a exit,always -S open -F exit=-EPERM

Syscall rules affect every single syscall made by every program. So, you want 
the rule to be efficient. In this case, checking the success field is 
redundant.

-Steve