Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 13 Mar 2018 06:11:08 -0400 | From | Richard Guy Briggs <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH ghak21 V2 3/4] audit: add refused symlink to audit_names |
| |
On 2018-03-13 09:35, Steve Grubb wrote: > On Mon, 12 Mar 2018 11:52:56 -0400 > Richard Guy Briggs <rgb@redhat.com> wrote: > > > On 2018-03-12 11:53, Paul Moore wrote: > > > On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 11:26 AM, Richard Guy Briggs > > > <rgb@redhat.com> wrote: > > > > On 2018-03-12 11:12, Paul Moore wrote: > > > >> On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 2:31 AM, Richard Guy Briggs > > > >> <rgb@redhat.com> wrote: > > > >> > Audit link denied events for symlinks had duplicate PATH > > > >> > records rather than just updating the existing PATH record. > > > >> > Update the symlink's PATH record with the current dentry and > > > >> > inode information. > > > >> > > > > >> > See: https://github.com/linux-audit/audit-kernel/issues/21 > > > >> > Signed-off-by: Richard Guy Briggs <rgb@redhat.com> > > > >> > --- > > > >> > fs/namei.c | 1 + > > > >> > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) > > > >> > > > >> Why didn't you include this in patch 4/4 like I asked during the > > > >> previous review? > > > > > > > > Please see the last comment of: > > > > https://www.redhat.com/archives/linux-audit/2018-March/msg00070.html > > > > > > Yes, I just saw that ... I hadn't seen your replies on the v1 > > > patches until I had finished reviewing v2. I just replied to that > > > mail in the v1 thread, but basically you need to figure out what is > > > necessary here and let us know. If I have to figure it out it > > > likely isn't going to get done with enough soak time prior to the > > > upcoming merge window. > > > > Steve? I was hoping you could chime in here. > > If the CWD record will always be the same as the PARENT record, then we > do not need the parent record. Duplicate information is bad. Like all > the duplicate SYSCALL information.
The CWD record could be different from the PARENT record, since I could have SYMLINK=/tmp/test/symlink, CWD=/tmp, PARENT=/tmp/test. Does the parent record even matter since it might not be a directory operation like creat, unlink or rename?
> -Steve > > > I'd just include it for completeness unless Steve thinks it will stand > > on its own and doesn't want the overhead. > > > > > >> > diff --git a/fs/namei.c b/fs/namei.c > > > >> > index 50d2533..00f5041 100644 > > > >> > --- a/fs/namei.c > > > >> > +++ b/fs/namei.c > > > >> > @@ -945,6 +945,7 @@ static inline int may_follow_link(struct > > > >> > nameidata *nd) if (nd->flags & LOOKUP_RCU) > > > >> > return -ECHILD; > > > >> > > > > >> > + audit_inode(nd->name, nd->stack[0].link.dentry, 0); > > > >> > audit_log_link_denied("follow_link", > > > >> > &nd->stack[0].link); return -EACCES; > > > >> > } > > > >> > > > >> paul moore > > > > > > > > - RGB > > > > > > paul moore > > > > - RGB
- RGB
-- Richard Guy Briggs <rgb@redhat.com> Sr. S/W Engineer, Kernel Security, Base Operating Systems Remote, Ottawa, Red Hat Canada IRC: rgb, SunRaycer Voice: +1.647.777.2635, Internal: (81) 32635
| |