From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1758068Ab3KHSYj (ORCPT ); Fri, 8 Nov 2013 13:24:39 -0500 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:30631 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757899Ab3KHSYi (ORCPT ); Fri, 8 Nov 2013 13:24:38 -0500 From: Paul Moore To: Andy Lutomirski Cc: libseccomp-discuss@lists.sourceforge.net, Eric Paris , James Hogan , Will Drewry , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , Russell King , "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" Subject: Re: [libseccomp-discuss] [PATCH v2] seccomp: not compatible with ARM OABI Date: Fri, 08 Nov 2013 13:23:53 -0500 Message-ID: <2521056.N3R8bTMgyo@sifl> Organization: Red Hat User-Agent: KMail/4.11.2 (Linux/3.10.13-gentoo; KDE/4.11.2; x86_64; ; ) In-Reply-To: References: <20131107174746.GA22344@www.outflux.net> <1464650.041viV29xe@sifl> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Friday, November 08, 2013 08:39:29 AM Andy Lutomirski wrote: > On Fri, Nov 8, 2013 at 8:29 AM, Paul Moore wrote: > > On Thursday, November 07, 2013 11:05:26 AM Andy Lutomirski wrote: > >> On Thu, Nov 7, 2013 at 10:56 AM, Eric Paris wrote: > >> > Isn't x32 similarly screwy? Does it work because the syscall numbers > >> > are different? > >> > >> Yes (from reading the code -- I haven't actually tried it). > > > > I've got a x32 VM that I boot occasionally to test seccomp/libseccomp. > > For the purposes of seccomp it looks exactly like x86_64, including > > sharing the same AUDIT_ARCH_X86_64 value, the only difference being the > > syscall number offset ... Assuming you're using kernel 3.9 or later. > > Previous kernels had a bug which stripped the x32 syscall offset so it was > > impossible to distinguish from x86_64 and x32 with seccomp. See the > > following commit for the details: > > Ooh -- where did you get this? (I imagine I could debootstrap such a > beast and then just chroot / nspawn / schroot in, but if there are > readily available images, that would be great. Fedora doesn't seem to > have much x32 support.) I built up a small Gentoo image: * http://distfiles.gentoo.org/releases/amd64/current-stage3 -- paul moore security and virtualization @ redhat