From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753243AbeE3NFD (ORCPT ); Wed, 30 May 2018 09:05:03 -0400 Received: from mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com ([148.163.158.5]:25816 "EHLO mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753025AbeE3NE7 (ORCPT ); Wed, 30 May 2018 09:04:59 -0400 Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/8] integrity: Add exe= and tty= before res= to integrity audits From: Mimi Zohar To: Paul Moore , Steve Grubb , Stefan Berger Cc: linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org, linux-audit@redhat.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Date: Wed, 30 May 2018 09:04:40 -0400 In-Reply-To: <1527634686.3534.27.camel@linux.vnet.ibm.com> References: <20180524201105.3179904-1-stefanb@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20180524201105.3179904-6-stefanb@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <4331521.GQBdaJNAj6@x2> <1527634686.3534.27.camel@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.20.5 (3.20.5-1.fc24) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00 x-cbid: 18053013-0008-0000-0000-000004FC9505 X-IBM-AV-DETECTION: SAVI=unused REMOTE=unused XFE=unused x-cbparentid: 18053013-0009-0000-0000-00001E90B846 Message-Id: <1527685480.3534.54.camel@linux.vnet.ibm.com> X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:,, definitions=2018-05-30_05:,, signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 priorityscore=1501 malwarescore=0 suspectscore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 clxscore=1015 lowpriorityscore=0 mlxscore=0 impostorscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1805220000 definitions=main-1805300148 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, 2018-05-29 at 18:58 -0400, Mimi Zohar wrote: > On Tue, 2018-05-29 at 17:47 -0400, Paul Moore wrote: > > On Tue, May 29, 2018 at 5:35 PM, Steve Grubb wrote: > > > On Tuesday, May 29, 2018 5:19:39 PM EDT Paul Moore wrote: > > >> On Thu, May 24, 2018 at 4:11 PM, Stefan Berger > > >> > > >> wrote: > > >> > Use the new public audit functions to add the exe= and tty= > > >> > parts to the integrity audit records. We place them before > > >> > res=. > > >> > > > >> > Signed-off-by: Stefan Berger > > >> > Suggested-by: Steve Grubb > > >> > --- > > >> > > > >> > security/integrity/integrity_audit.c | 2 ++ > > >> > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+) > > >> > > > >> > diff --git a/security/integrity/integrity_audit.c > > >> > b/security/integrity/integrity_audit.c index db30763d5525..8d25d3c4dcca > > >> > 100644 > > >> > --- a/security/integrity/integrity_audit.c > > >> > +++ b/security/integrity/integrity_audit.c > > >> > @@ -56,6 +56,8 @@ void integrity_audit_msg(int audit_msgno, struct inode > > >> > *inode,> > > >> > audit_log_untrustedstring(ab, inode->i_sb->s_id); > > >> > audit_log_format(ab, " ino=%lu", inode->i_ino); > > >> > > > >> > } > > >> > > > >> > + audit_log_d_path_exe(ab, current->mm); > > >> > + audit_log_tty(ab, current); > > >> > > >> NACK > > >> > > >> Please add the new fields to the end of the audit record, thank you. > > > > > > Let's see what an example event looks like before NACK'ing this. Way back in > > > 2013 the IMA events were good. I think this is repairing the event after some > > > drift. > > > > Can you reference a specific commit, or point in time during 2013? > > Looking at the git log quickly, if I go back to commit d726d8d719b6 > > ("integrity: move integrity_audit_msg()") from March 18, 2013 (the > > commit that created integrity_audit.c) the field ordering appears to > > be the same as it today. > > > > My NACK still stands. > > There hasn't been any changes up to now.  This patch set refactors > integrity_audit_msg(), creating integrity_audit_msg_common(), which > will be called from both ima_audit_measurement() and > ima_parse_rule(). That should have been "from integrity_audit_msg() and ima_parse_rule()", not ima_audit_measurement(). > Previously the audit record generated by ima_parse_rule() did not > include this info.  The change in this patch will affect both the > existing and the new INTEGRITY_AUDIT_POLICY_RULE audit records.