Bug 1991919
| Summary: | TIME_ADJNTPVAL audit events not generated if there are no syscalls rules | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8 | Reporter: | Grzegorz Halat <ghalat> |
| Component: | kernel | Assignee: | Richard Guy Briggs <rbriggs> |
| kernel sub component: | Audit | QA Contact: | Dennis(Zhuoheng) Li <denli> |
| Status: | CLOSED CURRENTRELEASE | Docs Contact: | |
| Severity: | low | ||
| Priority: | medium | CC: | dag, denli, georg.sauthoff, lilu, oliver, rbriggs, rik.theys, sgrubb |
| Version: | 8.4 | Keywords: | Triaged |
| Target Milestone: | beta | Flags: | pm-rhel:
mirror+
|
| Target Release: | --- | ||
| Hardware: | All | ||
| OS: | Linux | ||
| Whiteboard: | |||
| Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | If docs needed, set a value | |
| Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
| Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
| Last Closed: | 2022-10-05 18:44:46 UTC | Type: | Bug |
| Regression: | --- | Mount Type: | --- |
| Documentation: | --- | CRM: | |
| Verified Versions: | Category: | --- | |
| oVirt Team: | --- | RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host: | |
| Cloudforms Team: | --- | Target Upstream Version: | |
| Embargoed: | |||
|
Description
Grzegorz Halat
2021-08-10 11:59:17 UTC
This event is not supposed to be hardwired - meaning automatic. People will be very unhappy if that were the case. Because you don't get just 1 event, get get several each time there is a sync. And you get a sync pretty often. Meaning, that if this were on by default, it could potentially make a lot of events. It should not be triggered by the presence of just any old syscall rule. Rather you should need to place syscall rules on the time setting syscalls to trigger this. 2021-11-04: RFC patch v1 posted upstream https://listman.redhat.com/archives/linux-audit/2021-November/msg00024.html 2022-01-21: posted v2 upstream https://lore.kernel.org/all/9bd09a6b4433094803195a037ff59301a24eafc9.1642774100.git.rgb@redhat.com/ 2022-01-25: post v3 upstream https://lore.kernel.org/r/120b8aa605c9ee07fb300d433e136e261b27d6b2.1643167327.git.rgb@redhat.com 2022-02-14 post v4 https://lore.kernel.org/r/8581d6f4b9e732d11c258fe850666f1eefab828f.1644621720.git.rgb@redhat.com 2022-02-16 post v5 https://lore.kernel.org/r/d97744aaeee1cce34f793dabf9ce035354d73250.1645043410.git.rgb@redhat.com 2022-02-22 post v6 https://lore.kernel.org/r/37bcf09f68a9d711ed350d85169d4aa1abcb7775.1645140903.git.rgb@redhat.com upstreamed: 272ceeaea355 audit: log AUDIT_TIME_* records only from rules *** Bug 2095735 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** (In reply to Steve Grubb from comment #4) > This event is not supposed to be hardwired - meaning automatic. People will > be very unhappy if that were the case. Because you don't get just 1 event, > get get several each time there is a sync. And you get a sync pretty often. > Meaning, that if this were on by default, it could potentially make a lot of > events. It should not be triggered by the presence of just any old syscall > rule. Rather you should need to place syscall rules on the time setting > syscalls to trigger this. I couldn't agree more. But since this bug is still open, is the originally proposed change going forward into RHEL8, or not? However, on a RHEL8 server with 4.18.0-372.26.1.el8_6.x86_64 kernel (and just a few filesystem object audit rules and 2 unrelated syscall audit rules), I already get massively spammed by type=TIME_ADJNTPVAL and syscall=305 audit messages after starting a PTP daemon (sfptpd). Since the PTP daemon is calling clock_adjtime at a rate of 36 (!) per second, the audit log spam is quite excessive. Ok, I'm observing this when other audit syscall rules are active (i.e. just on sethostname,setdomainname) and this issue is about a situation where no syscall rules are active, at all. But this seems to be a weird default for that situation, also, right? Or would that be considered 'works as designed'? FWIW, my workaround is to disable this current default (?) via: auditctl -a never,exclude -F msgtype=TIME_ADJNTPVAL (`auditctl -D` is also a good work-around) (In reply to Georg Sauthoff from comment #16) > I couldn't agree more. But since this bug is still open, is the originally > proposed change going forward into RHEL8, or not? It is in RHEL8.7 kernel-4.18.0-399.el8. |