lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2020]   [Feb]   [5]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
Date
SubjectRe: [PATCH ghak90 V8 13/16] audit: track container nesting
On Tue, Feb 4, 2020 at 1:12 PM Steve Grubb <sgrubb@redhat.com> wrote:
> On Tuesday, February 4, 2020 10:52:36 AM EST Paul Moore wrote:
> > On Tue, Feb 4, 2020 at 10:47 AM Steve Grubb <sgrubb@redhat.com> wrote:
> > > On Tuesday, February 4, 2020 8:19:44 AM EST Richard Guy Briggs wrote:
> > > > > The established pattern is that we print -1 when its unset and "?"
> > > > > when
> > > > > its totalling missing. So, how could this be invalid? It should be
> > > > > set
> > > > > or not. That is unless its totally missing just like when we do not
> > > > > run
> > > > > with selinux enabled and a context just doesn't exist.
> > > >
> > > > Ok, so in this case it is clearly unset, so should be -1, which will be
> > > > a
> > > > 20-digit number when represented as an unsigned long long int.
> > > >
> > > > Thank you for that clarification Steve.
> > >
> > > It is literally a -1. ( 2 characters)
> >
> > Well, not as Richard has currently written the code, it is a "%llu".
> > This was why I asked the question I did; if we want the "-1" here we
> > probably want to special case that as I don't think we want to display
> > audit container IDs as signed numbers in general.
>
> OK, then go with the long number, we'll fix it in the interpretation. I guess
> we do the same thing for auid.

As I said above, I'm okay with a special case handling for unset/"-1"
in this case.

--
paul moore
www.paul-moore.com

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2020-02-05 23:58    [W:0.115 / U:1.604 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site