[PATCH ghak46 V1] audit: normalize MAC_STATUS record

[Steve Grubb]

On Monday, April 16, 2018 10:11:01 AM EDT Richard Guy Briggs wrote:
> On 2018-04-16 09:26, Ondrej Mosnacek wrote:
> > 2018-04-10 1:34 GMT+02:00 Richard Guy Briggs <rgb at redhat.com>:
> > > There were two formats of the audit MAC_STATUS record, one of which was
> > > more standard than the other.  One listed enforcing status changes and
> > > the other listed enabled status changes with a non-standard label.  In
> > > addition, the record was missing information about which LSM was
> > > responsible and the operation's completion status.  While this record
> > > is
> > > only issued on success, the parser expects the res= field to be
> > > present.
> > > 
> > > old enforcing/permissive:
> > > type=MAC_STATUS msg=audit(1523312831.378:24514): enforcing=0
> > > old_enforcing=1 auid=0 ses=1 old enable/disable:
> > > type=MAC_STATUS msg=audit(1523312831.378:24514): selinux=0 auid=0 ses=1
> > > 
> > > List both sets of status and old values and add the lsm= field and the
> > > res= field.
> > > 
> > > Here is the new format:
> > > type=MAC_STATUS msg=audit(1523293828.657:891): enforcing=0
> > > old_enforcing=1 auid=0 ses=1 enabled=1 old-enabled=1 lsm=selinux res=1
> > > 
> > > This record already accompanied a SYSCALL record.
> > > 
> > > See: https://github.com/linux-audit/audit-kernel/issues/46
> > > Signed-off-by: Richard Guy Briggs <rgb at redhat.com>
> > > ---
> > > 
> > >  security/selinux/selinuxfs.c | 11 +++++++----
> > >  1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> > > 
> > > diff --git a/security/selinux/selinuxfs.c
> > > b/security/selinux/selinuxfs.c
> > > index 00eed84..00b21b2 100644
> > > --- a/security/selinux/selinuxfs.c
> > > +++ b/security/selinux/selinuxfs.c
> > > @@ -145,10 +145,11 @@ static ssize_t sel_write_enforce(struct file
> > > *file, const char __user *buf,> > 
> > >                 if (length)
> > >                 
> > >                         goto out;
> > >                 
> > >                 audit_log(current->audit_context, GFP_KERNEL,
> > >                 AUDIT_MAC_STATUS,
> > > 
> > > -                       "enforcing=%d old_enforcing=%d auid=%u ses=%u",
> > > +                       "enforcing=%d old_enforcing=%d auid=%u ses=%u"
> > > +                       " enabled=%d old-enabled=%d lsm=selinux res=1",
> > 
> > This is just a tiny nit but why does "old_enforcing" use an underscore
> > and "old-enabled" a dash? Shouldn't the style be consistent across
> > fields?

Well, we have this thing called the field dictionary:

https://github.com/linux-audit/audit-documentation/blob/master/specs/fields/
field-dictionary.csv

If a field exists, we should reuse it and follow the exact formatting for the 
value side. In this case, old_enforcing is in the dictionary. So, it should 
be used.

> Yes, but my understanding is a preference for underscore, and not to
> change existing field names.
> 
> Steve?

When you are gluing 2 words together, I prefer a dash. But, in this case we 
alreday have precedent that the field name exists, so we should reuse it.

-Steve

> > Just my two cents...
> 
> These details are worth noticing, thank you.
> 
> > >                         new_value, selinux_enforcing,
> > >                         from_kuid(&init_user_ns,
> > >                         audit_get_loginuid(current)),
> > > 
> > > -                       audit_get_sessionid(current));
> > > +                       audit_get_sessionid(current), selinux_enabled,
> > > selinux_enabled);> > 
> > >                 selinux_enforcing = new_value;
> > >                 if (selinux_enforcing)
> > >                 
> > >                         avc_ss_reset(0);
> > > 
> > > @@ -272,9 +273,11 @@ static ssize_t sel_write_disable(struct file
> > > *file, const char __user *buf,> > 
> > >                 if (length)
> > >                 
> > >                         goto out;
> > >                 
> > >                 audit_log(current->audit_context, GFP_KERNEL,
> > >                 AUDIT_MAC_STATUS,
> > > 
> > > -                       "selinux=0 auid=%u ses=%u",
> > > +                       "enforcing=%d old_enforcing=%d auid=%u ses=%u"
> > > +                       " enabled=%d old-enabled=%d lsm=selinux res=1",
> > > +                       selinux_enforcing, selinux_enforcing,
> > 
> > ^ also here
> > 
> > >                         from_kuid(&init_user_ns,
> > >                         audit_get_loginuid(current)),
> > > 
> > > -                       audit_get_sessionid(current));
> > > +                       audit_get_sessionid(current), 0, 1);
> > > 
> > >         }
> > >         
> > >         length = count;
> > 
> > Ondrej Mosnacek <omosnace at redhat dot com>
> 
> - RGB
> 
> --
> Richard Guy Briggs <rgb at 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
> 
> --
> Linux-audit mailing list
> Linux-audit at redhat.com
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-audit




--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-security-module" in
the body of a message to majordomo at vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html