-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 382
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Process ID for linked binaries #3208
Comments
Hello, sorry we skipped this issue it seems: Tetragon is running on the host PID namespace so the PID you should see is the actual PID of the host. However containers runs in separate PID namespaces. So when you say "when I look into the /proc directory on the host where the container runs, I don't see the PID Tetragon gave me", are you sure you are running on the host PID namespace?
This is logical given how busybox works. However if you think you were in the correct PID namespace and can provide a reproducer, we'll surely take a look. |
Hi, Here is how you can reproduce this issue; given your k8s default namespace is being monitored by Tetragon, you just apply the manifest below which spins up an Alpine container with the
|
Hey,
I'm new to Tetragon and I've been experimenting with it for some time. I've seen an unexpected behaviour which I don't know if it's from Tetragon, eBPF, or the kernel itself.
So, I'm running an Alpine Linux container in a Kubernetes cluster which is being monitored by Tetragon. When I run the
/bin/sh
usingkubectl
, Tetragon gives me a process exec event with a PID. Note that in Alpine Linux,/bin/sh
is indeed a link to/bin/busybox
.The first issue is that when I look into the
/proc
directory on the host where the container runs, I don't see the PID Tetragon gave me; instead, I see a different PID that runs/bin/busybox
(its/proc/<pid>/exe
is/bin/busybox
and its/proc/<pid>/cmdline
is/bin/sh
).The second issue is that when the shell process exits, Tetragon gives me a process exit event with the same PID it gave for the process exec event (which does't exist in the
/proc
).I would really appreciate if anyone could shed some lights on this behaviour.
Thanks
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: