Re: [PATCH ghak124 v3] audit: log nftables configuration change events

[Florian Westphal]

Richard Guy Briggs <rgb@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 2021-02-11 23:09, Florian Westphal wrote:
> > So, if just a summary is needed a single audit_log_nfcfg()
> > after 'step 3' and outside of the list_for_each_entry_safe() is all
> > that is needed.
> 
> Ok, so it should not matter if it is before or after that
> list_for_each_entry_safe(), which could be used to collect that summary.

Right, it won't matter.

> > If a summary is wanted as well one could fe. count the number of
> > transaction types in the batch, e.g. table adds, chain adds, rule
> > adds etc. and then log a summary count instead.
> 
> The current fields are "table", "family", "entries", "op".
> 
> Could one batch change more than one table?  (I think it could?)

Yes.

> It appears it can change more than one family.
> "family" is currently a single integer, so that might need to be changed
> to a list, or something to indicate multi-family.

Yes, it can also affect different families.

> Listing all the ops seems a bit onerous.  Is there a hierarchy to the
> ops and if so, are they in that order in a batch or in nf_tables_commit()?

No.  There is a hierarchy, e.g. you can't add a chain without first
adding a table, BUT in case the table was already created by an earlier
transaction it can also be stand-alone.

> It seems I'd need to filter out the NFT_MSG_GET_* ops.

No need, the GET ops do not cause changes and will not trigger a
generation id change.