# Re: \[PATCH ghak90 V9 13/13\] audit: add capcontid to set contid outside init\_user\_ns

- From: Paul Moore \<paul@paul-moore.com\>
- Date: 2020-07-05 15:12:10 
- List: netdev
- Page: https://ratatoskr.run/netdev/2020/07/183480
- Thread: https://ratatoskr.run/linux-api/2020/06/183055/t.md

```text
On Sat, Jun 27, 2020 at 9:24 AM Richard Guy Briggs [ref] wrote:
>
> Provide a mechanism similar to CAP_AUDIT_CONTROL to explicitly give a
> process in a non-init user namespace the capability to set audit
> container identifiers of individual children.
>
> Provide the /proc/$PID/audit_capcontid interface to capcontid.
> Valid values are: 1==enabled, 0==disabled
>
> Writing a "1" to this special file for the target process $PID will
> enable the target process to set audit container identifiers of its
> descendants.
>
> A process must already have CAP_AUDIT_CONTROL in the initial user
> namespace or have had audit_capcontid enabled by a previous use of this
> feature by its parent on this process in order to be able to enable it
> for another process.  The target process must be a descendant of the
> calling process.
>
> Report this action in new message type AUDIT_SET_CAPCONTID 1022 with
> fields opid= capcontid= old-capcontid=
>
> Signed-off-by: Richard Guy Briggs <redacted>
> ---
>  fs/proc/base.c             | 57 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
>  include/linux/audit.h      | 14 ++++++++++++
>  include/uapi/linux/audit.h |  1 +
>  kernel/audit.c             | 38 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
>  4 files changed, 108 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

This seems very similar to the capable/ns_capable combination I
mentioned in patch 11/13; any reasons why you feel that this might be
a better approach?  My current thinking is that the capable/ns_capable
approach is preferable as it leverages existing kernel mechanisms and
doesn't require us to reinvent the wheel in the audit subsystem.


--
paul moore
www.paul-moore.com
```