[PATCH V6 05/10] audit: log creation and deletion of namespace instances

Richard Guy Briggs rgb at redhat.com
Fri May 15 02:11:26 UTC 2015


On 15/05/14, Oren Laadan wrote:
> On Thu, May 14, 2015 at 8:48 PM, Richard Guy Briggs <rgb at redhat.com> wrote:
> 
> >
> > > > > Recording each instance of a name space is giving me something that I
> > > > > cannot use to do queries required by the security target. Given these
> > > > > events, how do I locate a web server event where it accesses a
> > watched
> > > > > file? That authentication failed? That an update within the container
> > > > > failed?
> > > > >
> > > > > The requirements are that we have to log the creation, suspension,
> > > > > migration, and termination of a container. The requirements are not
> > on
> > > > > the individual name space.
> > > >
> > > > Ok.  Do we have a robust definition of a container?
> > >
> > > We call the combination of name spaces, cgroups, and seccomp rules a
> > > container.
> >
> > Can you detail what information is required from each?
> >
> > > > Where is that definition managed?
> > >
> > > In the thing that invokes a container.
> >
> > I was looking for a reference to a standards document rather than an
> > application...
> >
> >
> [focusing on "containers id" - snipped the rest away]
> 
> I am unfamiliar with the audit subsystem, but work with namespaces in other
> contexts. Perhaps the term "container" is overloaded here. The definition
> suggested by Steve in this thread makes sense to me: "a combination of
> namespaces". I imagine people may want to audit subsets of namespaces.

I assume it would be a bit more than that, including cgroup and seccomp info.

> For namespaces, can use a string like "A:B:C:D:E:F" as an identifier for a
> particular combination, where A-F are respective namespaces identifiers.
> (Can be taken for example from /proc/PID/ns/{mnt,uts,ipc,user,pid,net}).
>  That will even be grep-able to locate records related to a particular
> subset
> of namespaces. So a "container" in the classic meaning would have all A-F
> unique and different from the init process, but processes separated only by
> e.g. mnt-ns and net-ns will differ from the init process in  A and F.
> 
> (If a string is a no go, then perhaps combine the IDs in a unique way into a
> super ID).

I'd be fine with either, even including the nsfs deviceID.

> Oren.

- RGB

--
Richard Guy Briggs <rbriggs at redhat.com>
Senior Software Engineer, Kernel Security, AMER ENG Base Operating Systems, Red Hat
Remote, Ottawa, Canada
Voice: +1.647.777.2635, Internal: (81) 32635, Alt: +1.613.693.0684x3545


More information about the Containers mailing list