This is the mail archive of the mailing list for the glibc project.

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: What does LAV_CURRENT mean backwards compatibility of LD_AUDIT interface?

On 03/19/2015 06:38 PM, Ben Woodard wrote:
> I would agree and say that the implications are:
> 1) in the code fragment in the man page and in the example audit
> libraries in glibc we shouldn't just abort when the version passed
> into la_version() doesn't match the compiled in LAV_CURRENT. It
> should return the version of the audit interface that it was designed
> to use. Suggesting in the documentation that audit libraries simply
> return the version parameter that was passed into them seems ill
> advised.

Agreed, please send patches for that.

Please also send patches to the linux kernel man pages project.

> 2) at some point in the future if we have a not completely backward
> compatible change to the audit interface, we need to decide what to
> do when and if an audit library returns a version that glibc doesn't
> want to support anymore. However, I think that the odds of this
> happening before we have a successor to Linux and ELF are vanishingly
> unlikely.

The loader can detect that the audit module returned a version it doesn't
implement, and unload the module. The modules destructors can do any
cleanup and terminate the process of auditing was required.

In essence the loader lies to the module, sees what it wants, and then
unloads it if it can't meet that obligation.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]