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: 22+ 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 ` [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 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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox