On Thu, Feb 15, 2018 at 1:16 AM, Kees Cook <keesc...@chromium.org> wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 14, 2018 at 6:33 PM, Richard Guy Briggs <r...@redhat.com> wrote:
>> On 2018-02-14 09:51, Kees Cook wrote:
>>> On Wed, Feb 14, 2018 at 8:18 AM, Richard Guy Briggs <r...@redhat.com> wrote:
>>> > Audit link denied events emit disjointed records when audit is disabled.
>>> > No records should be emitted when audit is disabled.
>>> > See: https://github.com/linux-audit/audit-kernel/issues/21
>>> > Signed-off-by: Richard Guy Briggs <r...@redhat.com>
>>> > ---
>>> > kernel/audit.c | 3 +++
>>> > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
>>> > diff --git a/kernel/audit.c b/kernel/audit.c
>>> > index 227db99..4c3fd24 100644
>>> > --- a/kernel/audit.c
>>> > +++ b/kernel/audit.c
>>> > @@ -2261,6 +2261,9 @@ void audit_log_link_denied(const char *operation,
>>> > const struct path *link)
>>> > struct audit_buffer *ab;
>>> > struct audit_names *name;
>>> > + if (!audit_enabled || audit_dummy_context())
>>> > + return;
>>> > +
>>> > name = kzalloc(sizeof(*name), GFP_NOFS);
>>> > if (!name)
>>> > return;
>>> Doesn't this means errors here would be silent if audit isn't enabled?
>>> I don't that; sysadmins should see this notification regardless of the
>>> audit state...
>> This is a user error and not a system error, so I would think if system
>> auditing is disabled, they don't care about this kind of error.
> It could indicate an attack attempt...
We get beat up by several folks when we emit audit records with audit
disabled, and they have a very valid point.
I'm not arguing that the information isn't useful, I'm arguing that if
you are interested in the sort of information that audit provides you
should enable audit. :)
Linux-audit mailing list