From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>
To: Eric Paris <eparis@redhat.com>, Paul Moore <pmoore@redhat.com>
Cc: Richard Guy Briggs <rgb@redhat.com>,
linux-audit@redhat.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Al Viro <aviro@redhat.com>, Will Drewry <wad@chromium.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] [RFC] seccomp: give BPF x32 bit when restoring x32 filter
Date: Fri, 11 Jul 2014 09:30:36 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <53C0112C.1000707@zytor.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1405095813.2357.3.camel@flatline.rdu.redhat.com>
On 07/11/2014 09:23 AM, Eric Paris wrote:
>>
>> You're not going to hear me ever say that I like how the x32 ABI was done, it
>> is a real mess from a seccomp filter point of view and we have to do some
>> nasty stuff in libseccomp to make it all work correctly (see my comments on
>> the libseccomp-devel list regarding my severe displeasure over x32), but
>> what's done is done.
>>
>> I think it's too late to change the x32 seccomp filter ABI.
>
> So we have a security interface that is damn near impossible to get
> right. Perfect.
>
> I think this explains exactly why I support this idea. Make X32 look
> like everyone else and put these custom horrific hacks in seccomp if we
> are unwilling to 'do it right'
>
> Honestly, how many people are using seccomp on X32 and would be horribly
> pissed if we just fixed it?
>
The bigger issue is probably if we will open a problem with the older
kernels.
-hpa
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-07-11 16:30 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-07-11 3:38 [PATCH 0/3] [RFC] X32: fix syscall_get_nr while not breaking seccomp BPF Richard Guy Briggs
2014-07-11 3:38 ` Richard Guy Briggs
2014-07-11 3:38 ` [PATCH 1/3] [RFC] audit: add AUDIT_ARCH_X86_X32 arch definition Richard Guy Briggs
2014-07-11 16:15 ` Paul Moore
2014-07-11 3:38 ` [PATCH 2/3] [RFC] seccomp: give BPF x32 bit when restoring x32 filter Richard Guy Briggs
2014-07-11 3:38 ` Richard Guy Briggs
2014-07-11 4:06 ` H. Peter Anvin
2014-07-11 16:11 ` Paul Moore
2014-07-11 16:13 ` H. Peter Anvin
2014-07-11 16:16 ` Eric Paris
2014-07-11 16:21 ` Paul Moore
2014-07-11 16:23 ` Eric Paris
2014-07-11 16:30 ` H. Peter Anvin [this message]
2014-07-11 16:32 ` Paul Moore
2014-07-11 18:31 ` Eric Paris
2014-07-11 19:36 ` Paul Moore
2014-07-11 22:48 ` Kees Cook
2014-07-11 22:52 ` Kees Cook
2014-07-11 22:55 ` H. Peter Anvin
2014-07-11 23:02 ` Kees Cook
2014-07-11 23:12 ` Andy Lutomirski
2014-07-11 16:36 ` Paul Moore
2014-07-11 16:44 ` H. Peter Anvin
2014-07-11 3:38 ` [PATCH 3/3] [RFC] Revert "x86: remove the x32 syscall bitmask from syscall_get_nr()" Richard Guy Briggs
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=53C0112C.1000707@zytor.com \
--to=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=aviro@redhat.com \
--cc=eparis@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-audit@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pmoore@redhat.com \
--cc=rgb@redhat.com \
--cc=wad@chromium.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.