I have done some testing with this patch, we have some testsuites to
verify the
function of audit, and i will test it with the audit-testsuite.
Thanks.
Gaosheng
在 2021/10/14 5:15, Paul Moore 写道:
On Wed, Oct 13, 2021 at 5:10 AM Gaosheng Cui <[email protected]> wrote:
It is not necessary for audit_filter_rules() functions to check
audit fileds of the rule with a lower priority, and if we did,
there might be some unintended effects, such as the ctx->ppid
may be changed unexpectedly, so return early if the rule has
a lower priority.
Signed-off-by: Gaosheng Cui <[email protected]>
---
kernel/auditsc.c | 5 +++--
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
Thanks for this patch, it looks reasonable to me but have you done any
testing with this patch? If so, what have you done?
As a FYI, the audit-testsuite project lives here:
* https://github.com/linux-audit/audit-testsuite
diff --git a/kernel/auditsc.c b/kernel/auditsc.c
index 42d4a4320526..b517947bfa48 100644
--- a/kernel/auditsc.c
+++ b/kernel/auditsc.c
@@ -470,6 +470,9 @@ static int audit_filter_rules(struct task_struct *tsk,
u32 sid;
unsigned int sessionid;
+ if (ctx && rule->prio <= ctx->prio)
+ return 0;
+
cred = rcu_dereference_check(tsk->cred, tsk == current ||
task_creation);
for (i = 0; i < rule->field_count; i++) {
@@ -737,8 +740,6 @@ static int audit_filter_rules(struct task_struct *tsk,
}
if (ctx) {
- if (rule->prio <= ctx->prio)
- return 0;
if (rule->filterkey) {
kfree(ctx->filterkey);
ctx->filterkey = kstrdup(rule->filterkey, GFP_ATOMIC);
--
2.30.0
--
Linux-audit mailing list
[email protected]
https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-audit
