From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1751728AbbJYOnY (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Sun, 25 Oct 2015 10:43:24 -0400
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:44122 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com"
	rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id S1751292AbbJYOnW (ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Sun, 25 Oct 2015 10:43:22 -0400
Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2015 16:39:43 +0100
From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
To: Tycho Andersen <tycho.andersen@canonical.com>
Cc: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>, Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>,
        Will Drewry <wad@chromium.org>, Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net>,
        Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@parallels.com>,
        "Serge E. Hallyn" <serge.hallyn@ubuntu.com>,
        Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-api@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v8] seccomp, ptrace: add support for dumping seccomp
	filters
Message-ID: <20151025153943.GA1912@redhat.com>
References: <1445370612-18843-1-git-send-email-tycho.andersen@canonical.com> <1445370612-18843-2-git-send-email-tycho.andersen@canonical.com> <20151020202024.GA5772@redhat.com> <20151020220814.GA3232@hopstrocity> <20151021185146.GA27176@redhat.com> <20151021191533.GD30729@hopstrocity> <20151021210756.GA641@redhat.com> <20151021213306.GF30729@hopstrocity>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20151021213306.GF30729@hopstrocity>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On 10/21, Tycho Andersen wrote:
>
> > And this leads to another question... If we expect that this interface
> > can change later, then perhaps PTRACE_SECCOMP_GET_FILTER should also
> > dump some header before copy_to_user(fprog->filter) ? Say, just
> > "unsigned long version" == 0 for now. So that we can avoid
> > PTRACE_SECCOMP_GET_FILTER_V2 in future.
>
> So this is interesting. Like Kees mentioned, the bulk of the work
> would be done by the bpf syscall. We'd still need some way to get
> access to the fd itself, which we could (ab)use
> PTRACE_SECCOMP_GET_FILTER for, by returning the fd + BPF_MAXINSNS (so
> that it doesn't conflict with length) or something like that. Or add a
> _V2 as you say. If there is some change we can make to have a nicer
> interface than fd + BPF_MAXINSNS to future proof, I'm fine with making
> it.

Can't comment, this is up to you/Kees ;)

So, just in case, let me repeat I am fine with this patch.

Oleg.