On Wed, 2014-03-12 at 14:21 -0400, Richard Guy Briggs wrote: > On 14/03/12, Eric Paris wrote: > > On Wed, 2014-03-12 at 08:22 -0400, Steve Grubb wrote: > > > On Tuesday, March 11, 2014 06:15:17 PM Richard Guy Briggs wrote: > > > > Is zero a valid value for the pid member of the AUDIT_SIGNAL_INFO > > > > message? > > > > > > Well, pid=0 would be the kernel. So, its valid but unlikely. > > > > Actually, signals from the kernel will never get recorded here... > > > > > Offhand I don't > > > know why the kernel might try sending a signal. Is this a problem? > > > > He's trying to figure out how to store this info in light of pid > > namespaces. right now, auditd can only live in the initial pid > > namespace, so can only get signals from processes in the initial pid > > namespace, so we can store it as a number always in the initial pid > > namespace. But if auditd were ever to not be in the initial pid > > namespace, not sure what to do.... > > Nice word column alignment above there Eric... ;-) > > I would be inclined to always store it in the initial pid namespace and > then make a decision if it translates sanely when needed to the auditd > namespace(s).
since for now auditd pid_ns == init pid_ns that's fine. -- Linux-audit mailing list [email protected] https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-audit
