On Thu, Mar 1, 2018 at 8:41 PM, Richard Guy Briggs <r...@redhat.com> wrote: > On 2018-03-01 14:41, Richard Guy Briggs wrote: >> Implement the proc fs write to set the audit container ID of a process, >> emitting an AUDIT_CONTAINER record to document the event. >> >> This is a write from the container orchestrator task to a proc entry of >> the form /proc/PID/containerid where PID is the process ID of the newly >> created task that is to become the first task in a container, or an >> additional task added to a container. >> >> The write expects up to a u64 value (unset: 18446744073709551615). >> >> This will produce a record such as this: >> type=UNKNOWN msg=audit(1519903238.968:261): op=set pid=596 uid=0 >> subj=unconfined_u:unconfined_r:unconfined_t:s0-s0:c0.c1023 auid=0 tty=pts0 >> ses=1 opid=596 old-contid=18446744073709551615 contid=123455 res=0 >> >> The "op" field indicates an initial set. The "pid" to "ses" fields are >> the orchestrator while the "opid" field is the object's PID, the process >> being "contained". Old and new container ID values are given in the >> "contid" fields, while res indicates its success. >> >> It is not permitted to self-set, unset or re-set the container ID. A >> child inherits its parent's container ID, but then can be set only once >> after. > > There are more restrictions coming later: > - check that the child being set has no children or threads yet, or > forcibly set them all to the same container ID (assuming they all pass > the same tests). This will also prevent an orch from setting its > parent and other tit-for-tat games to circumvent the basic checks.
FYI, I think you may have a problem with something in your outgoing mail path; I didn't receive the original patchset you are referencing and it doesn't appear in the mail archive either. -- paul moore www.paul-moore.com