From: Richard Guy Briggs <[email protected]>
To: Paul Moore <[email protected]>
Cc: Jens Axboe <[email protected]>,
[email protected], [email protected],
[email protected],
Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi <[email protected]>,
[email protected], [email protected],
Alexander Viro <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] audit: add filtering for io_uring records, addendum
Date: Tue, 8 Jun 2021 08:55:05 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <[email protected]> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAHC9VhRa9dvCfPf5WHKYofrvQrGff7Lh+H4HMAhi_z3nK_rtoA@mail.gmail.com>
On 2021-06-07 19:15, Paul Moore wrote:
> On Mon, May 31, 2021 at 9:45 AM Richard Guy Briggs <[email protected]> wrote:
> > The commit ("audit: add filtering for io_uring records") added support for
> > filtering io_uring operations.
> >
> > Add checks to the audit io_uring filtering code for directory and path watches,
> > and to keep the list counts consistent.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Richard Guy Briggs <[email protected]>
> > ---
> > kernel/audit_tree.c | 3 ++-
> > kernel/audit_watch.c | 3 ++-
> > kernel/auditfilter.c | 7 +++++--
> > 3 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> Thanks for pointing these omissions out in the original patch. When a
> patch has obvious problems generally people just provide feedback and
> the patch author incorporates the fixes; this helps ensure we don't
> merge known broken patches, helping preserve `git bisect`.
>
> Do you mind if I incorporate these suggestions, and the one in patch
> 2/2, into the filtering patch in the original RFC patchset? I'll add
> a 'thank you' comment in the commit description as I did to the other
> patch where you provided feedback. I feel that is the proper way to
> handle this.
I should have been more explicit. The intent was to have the fixes
incorporated directly into your patches since they aren't committed in
any public tree yet, exactly for bisect reasons. I didn't add a
"fixes:" tag because it had no public commit hash, but could/should have
instead made a note about it or even used the "fixup:" subject tag.
Posting using the thread as the "in-reply-to:" for this patchset was the
simplest and clearest way to demonstrate the intent and check they were
correct and I was too lazy to add a cover letter explaining that. There
is also a Co-developed-by: tag that could be used if you feel that is
appropriate, now that you mention it, but that appears to imply a much
stronger equal contribution.
> > diff --git a/kernel/audit_tree.c b/kernel/audit_tree.c
> > index 6c91902f4f45..2be285c2f069 100644
> > --- a/kernel/audit_tree.c
> > +++ b/kernel/audit_tree.c
> > @@ -727,7 +727,8 @@ int audit_make_tree(struct audit_krule *rule, char *pathname, u32 op)
> > {
> >
> > if (pathname[0] != '/' ||
> > - rule->listnr != AUDIT_FILTER_EXIT ||
> > + (rule->listnr != AUDIT_FILTER_EXIT &&
> > + rule->listnr != AUDIT_FILTER_URING_EXIT) ||
> > op != Audit_equal ||
> > rule->inode_f || rule->watch || rule->tree)
> > return -EINVAL;
> > diff --git a/kernel/audit_watch.c b/kernel/audit_watch.c
> > index 2acf7ca49154..698b62b4a2ec 100644
> > --- a/kernel/audit_watch.c
> > +++ b/kernel/audit_watch.c
> > @@ -183,7 +183,8 @@ int audit_to_watch(struct audit_krule *krule, char *path, int len, u32 op)
> > return -EOPNOTSUPP;
> >
> > if (path[0] != '/' || path[len-1] == '/' ||
> > - krule->listnr != AUDIT_FILTER_EXIT ||
> > + (krule->listnr != AUDIT_FILTER_EXIT &&
> > + krule->listnr != AUDIT_FILTER_URING_EXIT) ||
> > op != Audit_equal ||
> > krule->inode_f || krule->watch || krule->tree)
> > return -EINVAL;
> > diff --git a/kernel/auditfilter.c b/kernel/auditfilter.c
> > index c21119c00504..bcdedfd1088c 100644
> > --- a/kernel/auditfilter.c
> > +++ b/kernel/auditfilter.c
> > @@ -153,7 +153,8 @@ char *audit_unpack_string(void **bufp, size_t *remain, size_t len)
> > static inline int audit_to_inode(struct audit_krule *krule,
> > struct audit_field *f)
> > {
> > - if (krule->listnr != AUDIT_FILTER_EXIT ||
> > + if ((krule->listnr != AUDIT_FILTER_EXIT &&
> > + krule->listnr != AUDIT_FILTER_URING_EXIT) ||
> > krule->inode_f || krule->watch || krule->tree ||
> > (f->op != Audit_equal && f->op != Audit_not_equal))
> > return -EINVAL;
> > @@ -250,6 +251,7 @@ static inline struct audit_entry *audit_to_entry_common(struct audit_rule_data *
> > pr_err("AUDIT_FILTER_ENTRY is deprecated\n");
> > goto exit_err;
> > case AUDIT_FILTER_EXIT:
> > + case AUDIT_FILTER_URING_EXIT:
> > case AUDIT_FILTER_TASK:
> > #endif
> > case AUDIT_FILTER_USER:
> > @@ -982,7 +984,8 @@ static inline int audit_add_rule(struct audit_entry *entry)
> > }
> >
> > entry->rule.prio = ~0ULL;
> > - if (entry->rule.listnr == AUDIT_FILTER_EXIT) {
> > + if (entry->rule.listnr == AUDIT_FILTER_EXIT ||
> > + entry->rule.listnr == AUDIT_FILTER_URING_EXIT) {
> > if (entry->rule.flags & AUDIT_FILTER_PREPEND)
> > entry->rule.prio = ++prio_high;
> > else
>
> 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:[~2021-06-08 12:55 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
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 [this message]
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