From: Richard Guy Briggs <[email protected]>
To: Paul Moore <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected], [email protected],
[email protected], [email protected],
[email protected],
Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi <[email protected]>,
Jens Axboe <[email protected]>,
Alexander Viro <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 4/9] audit: add filtering for io_uring records
Date: Wed, 2 Jun 2021 11:37:57 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <[email protected]> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAHC9VhSFNNE7AGGA20fDk201VLvzr5HB60VEqqq5qt9yGTH4mg@mail.gmail.com>
On 2021-06-01 21:40, Paul Moore wrote:
> On Mon, May 31, 2021 at 9:44 AM Richard Guy Briggs <[email protected]> wrote:
> > On 2021-05-30 11:26, Paul Moore wrote:
> > > On Fri, May 28, 2021 at 6:36 PM Richard Guy Briggs <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > > On 2021-05-21 17:50, Paul Moore wrote:
> > > > If we abuse the syscall infrastructure at first, we'd need a transition
> > > > plan to coordinate user and kernel switchover to seperate mechanisms for
> > > > the two to work together if the need should arise to have both syscall
> > > > and uring filters in the same rule.
> > >
> > > See my comments above, I don't currently see why we would ever want
> > > syscall and io_uring filtering to happen in the same rule. Please
> > > speak up if you can think of a reason why this would either be needed,
> > > or desirable for some reason.
> >
> > I think they can be seperate rules for now. Either a syscall rule
> > catching all io_uring ops can be added, or an io_uring rule can be added
> > to catch specific ops. The scenario I was thinking of was catching
> > syscalls of specific io_uring ops.
>
> Perhaps I'm misunderstand you, but that scenario really shouldn't
> exist. The io_uring ops function independently of syscalls; you can
> *submit* io_uring ops via io_uring_enter(), but they are not
> guaranteed to be dispatched synchronously (obviously), and given the
> cred shenanigans that can happen with io_uring there is no guarantee
> the filters would even be applicable.
That wasn't my understanding. There are a number of io_uring calls
starting with at least open that are currently synchronous (but may
become async in future) that we may want to single out which would be a
specific io_uring syscall with a specific io_uring opcode. I guess
that particular situation would be caught by the io_uring opcode
triggering an event that includes SYSCALL and URINGOP records.
> It isn't an issue of "can" the filters be separate, they *have* to be separate.
> paul moore
- RGB
--
Richard Guy Briggs <[email protected]>
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
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-06-02 15:38 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 71+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-05-21 21:49 [RFC PATCH 0/9] Add LSM access controls and auditing to io_uring Paul Moore
2021-05-21 21:49 ` [RFC PATCH 1/9] audit: prepare audit_context for use in calling contexts beyond syscalls Paul Moore
2021-05-21 21:49 ` [RFC PATCH 2/9] audit,io_uring,io-wq: add some basic audit support to io_uring Paul Moore
2021-05-22 0:22 ` Pavel Begunkov
2021-05-22 2:36 ` Paul Moore
2021-05-23 20:26 ` Pavel Begunkov
2021-05-24 19:59 ` Paul Moore
2021-05-25 8:27 ` Pavel Begunkov
2021-05-25 14:53 ` Paul Moore
2021-05-26 1:11 ` Jens Axboe
2021-05-26 2:04 ` Paul Moore
2021-05-26 10:19 ` Pavel Begunkov
2021-05-26 14:38 ` Paul Moore
2021-05-26 15:11 ` Steve Grubb
2021-05-26 15:17 ` Stefan Metzmacher
2021-05-26 15:49 ` Richard Guy Briggs
2021-05-26 17:22 ` Jens Axboe
2021-05-27 17:27 ` Richard Guy Briggs
2021-05-26 15:49 ` Victor Stewart
2021-05-26 16:38 ` Casey Schaufler
2021-05-26 17:15 ` Jens Axboe
2021-05-26 17:31 ` Jens Axboe
2021-05-26 17:54 ` Jens Axboe
2021-05-26 18:01 ` Jens Axboe
2021-05-26 18:44 ` Paul Moore
2021-05-26 18:57 ` Pavel Begunkov
2021-05-26 19:10 ` Paul Moore
2021-05-26 19:44 ` Jens Axboe
2021-05-26 20:19 ` Paul Moore
2021-05-28 16:02 ` Paul Moore
2021-06-02 8:26 ` Pavel Begunkov
2021-06-02 15:46 ` Richard Guy Briggs
2021-06-03 10:39 ` Pavel Begunkov
2021-06-02 19:46 ` Paul Moore
2021-06-03 10:51 ` Pavel Begunkov
2021-06-03 15:54 ` Casey Schaufler
2021-06-03 15:54 ` Jens Axboe
2021-06-04 5:04 ` Paul Moore
2021-05-26 18:38 ` Paul Moore
2021-06-02 17:29 ` [RFC PATCH 2/9] audit, io_uring, io-wq: " Richard Guy Briggs
2021-06-02 20:46 ` Paul Moore
2021-08-25 1:21 ` Richard Guy Briggs
2021-08-25 19:41 ` Paul Moore
2021-05-21 21:50 ` [RFC PATCH 3/9] audit: dev/test patch to force io_uring auditing Paul Moore
2021-05-21 21:50 ` [RFC PATCH 4/9] audit: add filtering for io_uring records Paul Moore
2021-05-28 22:35 ` Richard Guy Briggs
2021-05-30 15:26 ` Paul Moore
2021-05-31 13:44 ` Richard Guy Briggs
2021-06-02 1:40 ` Paul Moore
2021-06-02 15:37 ` Richard Guy Briggs [this message]
2021-06-02 17:20 ` Paul Moore
2021-05-31 13:44 ` [PATCH 1/2] audit: add filtering for io_uring records, addendum Richard Guy Briggs
2021-05-31 16:08 ` kernel test robot
2021-05-31 17:38 ` kernel test robot
2021-06-07 23:15 ` Paul Moore
2021-06-08 12:55 ` Richard Guy Briggs
2021-06-09 2:45 ` Paul Moore
2021-05-31 13:44 ` [PATCH 2/2] audit: block PERM fields being used with io_uring filtering Richard Guy Briggs
2021-05-21 21:50 ` [RFC PATCH 5/9] fs: add anon_inode_getfile_secure() similar to anon_inode_getfd_secure() Paul Moore
2021-05-21 21:50 ` [RFC PATCH 6/9] io_uring: convert io_uring to the secure anon inode interface Paul Moore
2021-05-21 21:50 ` [RFC PATCH 7/9] lsm,io_uring: add LSM hooks to io_uring Paul Moore
2021-05-26 14:48 ` Stefan Metzmacher
2021-05-26 20:45 ` Paul Moore
2021-05-21 21:50 ` [RFC PATCH 8/9] selinux: add support for the io_uring access controls Paul Moore
2021-05-21 21:50 ` [RFC PATCH 9/9] Smack: Brutalist io_uring support with debug Paul Moore
2021-05-22 0:53 ` [RFC PATCH 0/9] Add LSM access controls and auditing to io_uring Tetsuo Handa
2021-05-22 2:06 ` Paul Moore
2021-05-26 15:00 ` Jeff Moyer
2021-05-26 18:49 ` Paul Moore
2021-05-26 19:07 ` Jeff Moyer
2021-05-26 19:10 ` Paul Moore
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 \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
/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