Add an auditd-based process tracker event artifact for Linux #3546
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
scudette
reviewed
Jun 8, 2024
| timestamp( | ||
| string=Timestamp) AS start_time, | ||
| NULL AS end_time | ||
| FROM scope() |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
You probably dont need a SELECT here - just use a dict() directly?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I agree, but I am not sure that the result will be any better or more readable?
| NULL AS start_time, | ||
| timestamp( | ||
| string=Timestamp) AS end_time | ||
| FROM scope() |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Same here - generally SELECT from scope() means it is not needed
- Refer to auditctl using absolute path - Check whether /sbin/auditctl exists - All commands now depend on auditctl to exist before doing anything - Add a number of informational log messages - Let user specify auditctl path (it may also be in /usr/sbin/auditctl) - Add missing 'install' command in apt-get - Move preconditions that didn't really do anything from WHERE to a guard around the whole query (execves ran anyway)
In particular, include all UIDs, making the output from process_tracker_pslist(), as well as the raw updates sent in the event artifact, far more useful in investigations.
scudette
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jun 30, 2024
This artifact provides updates to the process tracker in a very similar fashion as *Windows.Events.TrackProcesses*. It uses the integrated `audit()` function and inserts rules as it runs, and removes them in an `atexit()` call. I haven't found a way to audit process exits when neither "exit" nor "exit_group" are called by the process. Auditing the sys. calls "sigreturn"/"rt_sigreturn" does not seem to help. I haven't created any test code, as this would probably require mocking code in go. I'll give it a shot if needed.
scudette
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jun 30, 2024
This artifact provides updates to the process tracker in a very similar fashion as *Windows.Events.TrackProcesses*. It uses the integrated `audit()` function and inserts rules as it runs, and removes them in an `atexit()` call. I haven't found a way to audit process exits when neither "exit" nor "exit_group" are called by the process. Auditing the sys. calls "sigreturn"/"rt_sigreturn" does not seem to help. I haven't created any test code, as this would probably require mocking code in go. I'll give it a shot if needed.
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This artifact provides updates to the process tracker in a very similar fashion as Windows.Events.TrackProcesses. It uses the integrated
audit()function and inserts rules as it runs, and removes them in anatexit()call. I haven't found a way to audit process exits when neither "exit" nor "exit_group" are called by the process. Auditing the sys. calls "sigreturn"/"rt_sigreturn" does not seem to help.I haven't created any test code, as this would probably require mocking code in go. I'll give it a shot if needed.