From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.9 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,NICE_REPLY_A,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 592D4C47082 for ; Thu, 3 Jun 2021 10:40:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 353256138C for ; Thu, 3 Jun 2021 10:40:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S229721AbhFCKmU (ORCPT ); Thu, 3 Jun 2021 06:42:20 -0400 Received: from mail-ej1-f52.google.com ([209.85.218.52]:41958 "EHLO mail-ej1-f52.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229506AbhFCKmU (ORCPT ); Thu, 3 Jun 2021 06:42:20 -0400 Received: by mail-ej1-f52.google.com with SMTP id gb17so8491603ejc.8; Thu, 03 Jun 2021 03:40:21 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=to:cc:references:from:subject:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=jjgngqqiD1MzF4drjDhfJO81FwwmSm8rHRAQDoLI4hk=; b=i5zdCu7eh+exc3xVtGwn/14tE99F9S6SruDvOQWgTazyiiWQej8zLeVr2UmL4UvcE4 feRfK8yNI/0EVqCRgzt4FDrXsFhXitU/G5Kr7vmnJy2h8CxxTlQ/mY4WUjlcrqgE0epg 0GrCkvW1TMNs5xoY5poEBZlfW50G0Ay6IkEFxzGZzaibL52u8IlG09QzmHMajSdAg+dH zzEnJcXMVB6R+FW3kgS0AYEoJyv8HlB6kTD/1F/5+vqfFNTH4qS80g7stAYowIr7O4i6 Ir6CJRD/7o6g7jZ9q+1XbuPqThLD+ES/asQm7haHvhoahEOgULrRGaITDwkKWtLHhB2y fFrQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:to:cc:references:from:subject:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=jjgngqqiD1MzF4drjDhfJO81FwwmSm8rHRAQDoLI4hk=; b=KF7M7MHyQ72Lgsz9h4BAaNPN7OqToOkulRHxtxfp6wxNzBKAsPyW4GcuUud2Lr/dUs DTX94thpJ1fQvGaWS+xKkh2Nb7xR0NTQCmTx0US4mNQZ0Xe5rhRy0pw+9jwYEDRj5P2F CXJ2rSCW4azglrH+G9IQB9nu0t67oiVDv995b/5g9IIlIqwi0QNOC2oPTEQVxWcOIaJW R/rPNDmdotlHCM+J5398FYhnUdLDypfuav1YuvkYB/Ae21I6X/V0vktryn4cOz3IPi/S NndfA/9vm3qSRMlkqqbLctn6yRF+iMrWauRHQsSeOgaDYCmzG7U7uvAqpy5EJjrV/o7y 5aTw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533SluP/l9klCIlVrqwU3ZB8/dultsiXwI7T45BbgRUE0W3YIKUK uuLwYL+T6J4+E1xtJSZd6xU= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxBNyhzAnY+FdObN7pnTAta+DGpnvQFV2i3L7an+ohCIQSKtw/KtDZc/3aOtErcO8sTHGd/6Q== X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:af7b:: with SMTP id os27mr23608805ejb.154.1622716761257; Thu, 03 Jun 2021 03:39:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ?IPv6:2620:10d:c096:310::2410? ([2620:10d:c093:600::2:6c45]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id s2sm1565455edu.89.2021.06.03.03.39.20 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 03 Jun 2021 03:39:20 -0700 (PDT) To: Richard Guy Briggs Cc: Paul Moore , Jens Axboe , selinux@vger.kernel.org, linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org, linux-audit@redhat.com, Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi , linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, io-uring@vger.kernel.org, Alexander Viro References: <9e69e4b6-2b87-a688-d604-c7f70be894f5@kernel.dk> <3bef7c8a-ee70-d91d-74db-367ad0137d00@kernel.dk> <94e50554-f71a-50ab-c468-418863d2b46f@gmail.com> <20210602154638.GA3711857@madcap2.tricolour.ca> From: Pavel Begunkov Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 2/9] audit,io_uring,io-wq: add some basic audit support to io_uring Message-ID: Date: Thu, 3 Jun 2021 11:39:11 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.10.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20210602154638.GA3711857@madcap2.tricolour.ca> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: io-uring@vger.kernel.org On 6/2/21 4:46 PM, Richard Guy Briggs wrote: > On 2021-06-02 09:26, Pavel Begunkov wrote: >> On 5/28/21 5:02 PM, Paul Moore wrote: >>> On Wed, May 26, 2021 at 4:19 PM Paul Moore wrote: >>>> ... If we moved the _entry >>>> and _exit calls into the individual operation case blocks (quick >>>> openat example below) so that only certain operations were able to be >>>> audited would that be acceptable assuming the high frequency ops were >>>> untouched? My initial gut feeling was that this would involve >50% of >>>> the ops, but Steve Grubb seems to think it would be less; it may be >>>> time to look at that a bit more seriously, but if it gets a NACK >>>> regardless it isn't worth the time - thoughts? >>>> >>>> case IORING_OP_OPENAT: >>>> audit_uring_entry(req->opcode); >>>> ret = io_openat(req, issue_flags); >>>> audit_uring_exit(!ret, ret); >>>> break; >>> >>> I wanted to pose this question again in case it was lost in the >>> thread, I suspect this may be the last option before we have to "fix" >>> things at the Kconfig level. I definitely don't want to have to go >>> that route, and I suspect most everyone on this thread feels the same, >>> so I'm hopeful we can find a solution that is begrudgingly acceptable >>> to both groups. >> >> May work for me, but have to ask how many, and what is the >> criteria? I'd think anything opening a file or manipulating fs: >> >> IORING_OP_ACCEPT, IORING_OP_CONNECT, IORING_OP_OPENAT[2], >> IORING_OP_RENAMEAT, IORING_OP_UNLINKAT, IORING_OP_SHUTDOWN, >> IORING_OP_FILES_UPDATE >> + coming mkdirat and others. >> >> IORING_OP_CLOSE? IORING_OP_SEND IORING_OP_RECV? >> >> What about? >> IORING_OP_FSYNC, IORING_OP_SYNC_FILE_RANGE, >> IORING_OP_FALLOCATE, IORING_OP_STATX, >> IORING_OP_FADVISE, IORING_OP_MADVISE, >> IORING_OP_EPOLL_CTL >> >> >> Another question, io_uring may exercise asynchronous paths, >> i.e. io_issue_sqe() returns before requests completes. >> Shouldn't be the case for open/etc at the moment, but was that >> considered? > > This would be why audit needs to monitor a thread until it wraps up, to > wait for the result code. My understanding is that both sync and async > parts of an op would be monitored. There may be a misunderstanding audit_start(req) ret = io_issue_sqe(req); audit_end(ret); io_issue_sqe() may return 0 but leave the request inflight, which will be completed asynchronously e.g. by IRQ, not going through io_issue_sqe() or any io_read()/etc helpers again, and after last audit_end() had already happened. That's the case with read/write/timeout, but is not true for open/etc. >> I don't see it happening, but would prefer to keep it open >> async reimplementation in a distant future. Does audit sleep? > > Some parts do, some parts don't depending on what they are interacting > with in the kernel. It can be made to not sleep if needed. Ok, good -- Pavel Begunkov