Re: [PATCH 1/2] integrity: Add errno field in audit message

[Paul Moore]

On Wed, Jun 10, 2020 at 9:58 PM Lakshmi Ramasubramanian
<nramas@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 6/10/20 6:45 PM, Paul Moore wrote:
>
> Hi Paul,
>
> > I'm sorry I didn't get a chance to mention this before you posted this
> > patch, but for the past several years we have been sticking with a
> > policy of only adding new fields to the end of existing records;
> > please adjust this patch accordingly.  Otherwise, this looks fine to
> > me.
> >
> >>          audit_log_untrustedstring(ab, get_task_comm(name, current));
> >>          if (fname) {
> >>                  audit_log_format(ab, " name=");
> >> --
>
> Steve mentioned that since this new field "errno" is not a searchable
> entry, it can be added anywhere in the audit log message.

Steve and I have a different opinion on this issue.  I won't rehash
the long argument or drag you into it, but I will just say that the
*kernel* has had a policy of only adding fields to the end of existing
records unless under extreme cases (this is not an extreme case).

> But I have no problem moving this to the end of the audit record.

Great, please do that.  Thank you.

-- 
paul moore
www.paul-moore.com