From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Al Viro Subject: Re: linux-audit: reconstruct path names from syscall events? Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2012 00:54:47 +0100 Message-ID: <20121009235446.GZ2616@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> References: <20110917001215.GA961@zombie.hq.fstein.net> <20121009233927.GX2616@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Mark Moseley Cc: john@feurix.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-audit@redhat.com List-Id: linux-audit@redhat.com On Tue, Oct 09, 2012 at 04:47:17PM -0700, Mark Moseley wrote: > > BTW, what makes you think that container's root is even reachable from > > "the host's /"? There is no such thing as "root of the OS itself"; different > > processes can (and in case of containers definitely do) run in different > > namespaces. With entirely different filesystems mounted in those, and > > no promise whatsoever that any specific namespace happens to have all > > filesystems mounted somewhere in it... > > Nothing beyond guesswork, since it's been a while since I've played > with LXC. In any case, I was struggling a bit for the correct > terminology. > > Am I similarly off-base with regards to the chroot'd scenario? chroot case is going to be reachable from namespace root, but I seriously doubt that pathname relative to that will be more useful... Again, relying on pathnames for forensics (or security in general) is a serious mistake (cue unprintable comments about apparmor and similar varieties of snake oil). And using audit as poor man's ktrace analog is... misguided, to put it very mildly.