From: John Dennis <jdennis@redhat.com>
To: Steve Grubb <sgrubb@redhat.com>
Cc: William Kelly <wkelly@rackspace.com>,
linux-audit@redhat.com, Bret Piatt <bret.piatt@rackspace.com>
Subject: Re: get_field_str() and interpret_field() bug with multi-word fields
Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2008 17:40:00 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <48A20330.7090206@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200808121718.36331.sgrubb@redhat.com>
[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1989 bytes --]
Steve Grubb wrote:
> On Tuesday 12 August 2008 16:57:59 John Dennis wrote:
>
>> Let me give you a simple example, suppose this key/value pair was in an
>> audit record:
>>
>> foo=00
>>
>> How does one know which of the possible values foo has:
>>
>> 1) it's the integer zero (but in what radix? does the leading zero imply
>> octal or is it just an insignificant digit?)
>>
>> 2) it's the hexadecimal encoding of a single character string containing
>> one null byte.
>>
>> 3) it's the 2 character string "00" consisting of two zero characters.
>>
>> The fact is it's ambiguous, it could be any of the above. It's ambiguous
>> because the audit stream is an improperly specified protocol.
>>
>
> John, this is the way that the kernel works. The kernel and user space
> utilities that interface to it are developed together with an understanding
> of how the numbers are represented. Go take a look in /proc/1/stat. What does
> any of that mean? Is it parsable? I'll guarantee its defined well enough
> program can use it.
>
Bad example, proc works because it's (mostly) well defined. Sorry, but
the audit stream is not well defined, it can change at any time. We have
existence proofs of it changing. That doesn't even take into account
"user audit data". A properly specified protocol is immune to these
problems.
> The point is that all of /proc is written without implicit parsing rules.
> That's the way it is when dealing with kernel and its user space utilities.
> There is no field in the kernel that is unhandled by the audit system and
> without knowing specifically what's in it.
>
I'm sorry Steve, but this simply doesn't work. How the heck am I
supposed to correctly parse an audit log file from 5 years ago if either
I don't know the kernel version that produced it or have available the
matching user space tools from that era? This is going to be an absolute
nightmare for IPA and other compliance tools.
--
John Dennis <jdennis@redhat.com>
[-- Attachment #1.2: Type: text/html, Size: 2557 bytes --]
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 0 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-08-12 21:40 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 37+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-08-12 17:49 get_field_str() and interpret_field() bug with multi-word fields Jonathan Kelly
2008-08-12 18:05 ` LC Bruzenak
2008-08-12 18:52 ` John Dennis
2008-08-12 19:02 ` LC Bruzenak
2008-08-12 18:16 ` John Dennis
2008-08-12 21:13 ` Steve Grubb
2008-08-12 22:10 ` Matthew Booth
2008-08-12 23:01 ` Eric Paris
2008-08-12 19:16 ` Steve Grubb
2008-08-12 19:58 ` John Dennis
2008-08-12 20:11 ` Eric Paris
2008-08-12 20:32 ` Steve Grubb
2008-08-12 21:09 ` John Dennis
2008-08-12 21:24 ` Steve Grubb
2008-08-12 22:37 ` John Dennis
2008-08-13 0:33 ` Klaus Heinrich Kiwi
2008-08-13 15:09 ` Eric Paris
2008-08-13 16:25 ` Klaus Heinrich Kiwi
2008-08-13 17:02 ` Steve Grubb
2008-08-13 17:30 ` LC Bruzenak
2008-08-13 18:49 ` Linda Knippers
2008-08-13 19:58 ` John Dennis
2008-08-14 18:25 ` Stephen Smalley
2008-08-15 13:58 ` Matteo Michelini
2008-08-15 14:10 ` Steve Grubb
2008-08-15 15:27 ` Matteo Michelini
2008-08-15 14:15 ` Stephen Smalley
2008-08-13 16:29 ` John Dennis
2008-08-13 22:35 ` Casey Schaufler
2008-08-12 20:57 ` John Dennis
2008-08-12 21:18 ` Steve Grubb
2008-08-12 21:40 ` John Dennis [this message]
2008-08-12 21:53 ` Steve Grubb
2008-08-12 22:11 ` John Dennis
2008-08-12 22:46 ` Steve Grubb
2008-08-12 22:59 ` Eric Paris
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2008-08-13 16:57 Jonathan Kelly
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=48A20330.7090206@redhat.com \
--to=jdennis@redhat.com \
--cc=bret.piatt@rackspace.com \
--cc=linux-audit@redhat.com \
--cc=sgrubb@redhat.com \
--cc=wkelly@rackspace.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox