Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 6 Sep 2012 12:45:36 -0400 | From | Dave Jones <> | Subject | Re: 3.6-rc4 audit_log_d_path oops. |
| |
On Thu, Sep 06, 2012 at 09:32:49AM -0700, Kees Cook wrote: > > I just realised, the funny thing about this is that the machine running that test > > had selinux/audit disabled. And yet here we are, screwing around with audit buffers. > > The intent was to have this message show up in dmesg even if auditd > wasn't running, and even if the specific process wasn't being > explicitly audited. > > > Should there be a test on audit_enable=0 in audit_log_link_denied() ? > > > > I'm now curious how much more of the audit code is getting run through similar lack of tests > > What is the condition in which audit_log_start fails?
in the case of that oops, given I had booted with audit=0, I suspect it was hitting the first check...
1157 if (audit_initialized != AUDIT_INITIALIZED) 1158 return NULL; Dave
| |