From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:40496)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <armbru@redhat.com>) id 1ZhcdG-0007Wm-Dk
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 01 Oct 2015 08:06:50 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <armbru@redhat.com>) id 1ZhcdA-00029K-Ly
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 01 Oct 2015 08:06:42 -0400
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:39772)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <armbru@redhat.com>) id 1ZhcdA-000295-G6
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 01 Oct 2015 08:06:36 -0400
From: Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com>
References: <N1-fOl1digGhI@Safe-mail.net>
Date: Thu, 01 Oct 2015 14:06:32 +0200
In-Reply-To: <N1-fOl1digGhI@Safe-mail.net> (Namsun Ch'o's message of "Thu, 1
	Oct 2015 00:36:05 -0400")
Message-ID: <87r3leztbr.fsf@blackfin.pond.sub.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] Add syscalls for -runas and -chroot to the
	seccomp sandbox
List-Id: <qemu-devel.nongnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/options/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Namsun Ch'o <namnamc@Safe-mail.net>
Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org, eduardo.otubo@profitbricks.com

"Namsun Ch'o" <namnamc@Safe-mail.net> writes:

> The seccomp sandbox doesn't whitelist setuid, setgid, or setgroups, which are
> needed for -runas to work. It also doesn't whitelist chroot, which is needed
> for the -chroot option. Unfortunately, QEMU enables seccomp before it drops
> privileges or chroots, so without these whitelisted, -runas and -chroot cause
> QEMU to be killed with -sandbox on. This patch adds those syscalls.

Should it enable seccomp a bit later?