Re: 3.6-rc4 audit_log_d_path oops.

[Dave Jones]

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

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/