Re: Hundreds of null PATH records for *init_module syscall audit logs

[Steve Grubb]

On Monday, March 6, 2017 4:49:21 PM EST Richard Guy Briggs wrote:
> > Blocking PATH record on creation based on syscall *really* seems like
> > a bad/dangerous idea.  If we want to block all these tracefs/debugfs
> > records, let's just block the fs.  Although as of right now I'm not a
> > fan of blocking anything.
> 
> I agree.  What makes me leery of this approach is if a kernel module in
> turn accesses directly other files, or bypasses the load_module call to
> load another module from a file and avoids logging.

In this case, we want a second event with that module name. We do not want any 
PATH records.

-Steve