AUDIT_NETFILTER_PKT message format

[Steve Grubb]

On Wednesday, January 18, 2017 7:32:40 AM EST Paul Moore wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 12:39 AM, Richard Guy Briggs <rgb at redhat.com> wrote:
> > On 2017-01-17 21:34, Richard Guy Briggs wrote:
> >> On 2017-01-17 15:17, Paul Moore wrote:
> >> > On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 11:12 AM, Richard Guy Briggs <rgb at redhat.com> 
wrote:
> >> > > On 2017-01-17 08:55, Steve Grubb wrote:
> >> > >> On Tuesday, January 17, 2017 12:25:51 AM EST Richard Guy Briggs 
wrote:
> >> > ...
> >> > 
> >> > >> > Ones that are not so straightforward:
> >> > >> > - "secmark" depends on a kernel config setting, so should it
> >> > >> > always be
> >> > >> > 
> >> > >> >   present but "(none)" if that kernel feature is compiled out?
> >> > >> 
> >> > >> If this is selinux related, I'd treat it the same way that we do
> >> > >> subj
> >> > >> everywhere else.
> >> > > 
> >> > > Ok.
> >> > 
> >> > To be clear, a packet's secmark should be recorded via a dedicated
> >> > field, e.g. "secmark", and not use the "subj" field (it isn't a
> >> > subject label in the traditional sense).
> >> 
> >> I think Steve was talking about if, when or where to include that field,
> >> not what its label is.
> > 
> > In this case it is an "obj=" field, but since it is part of the LSM,
> > each one has its own fields.
> 
> As I said above, use a "secmark" field and not the subject or object
> fields; packet labeling is rather complex and there is value in
> differentiating between secmark labels and network peer labels.

As Richard said, I was talking about when to include it, not what to include. 
Context labels go through this test to check if there is a secid and log 
context information if its there. This keeps the logs self consistent if a MAC 
framework is compiled in or not.

-Steve