From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2B02BC433FE for ; Wed, 3 Nov 2021 18:36:32 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 102CE61076 for ; Wed, 3 Nov 2021 18:36:32 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S231345AbhKCSjG (ORCPT ); Wed, 3 Nov 2021 14:39:06 -0400 Received: from out01.mta.xmission.com ([166.70.13.231]:59636 "EHLO out01.mta.xmission.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S230229AbhKCSjF (ORCPT ); Wed, 3 Nov 2021 14:39:05 -0400 Received: from in02.mta.xmission.com ([166.70.13.52]:56630) by out01.mta.xmission.com with esmtps (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.93) (envelope-from ) id 1miL7b-00DM2D-Hu; Wed, 03 Nov 2021 12:36:27 -0600 Received: from ip68-227-160-95.om.om.cox.net ([68.227.160.95]:53194 helo=email.xmission.com) by in02.mta.xmission.com with esmtpsa (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.93) (envelope-from ) id 1miL7a-0029m0-8a; Wed, 03 Nov 2021 12:36:26 -0600 From: ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman) To: Kees Cook Cc: Andrea Righi , Shuah Khan , Alexei Starovoitov , Andy Lutomirski , Will Drewry , linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org, bpf@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-hardening@vger.kernel.org References: <202110280955.B18CB67@keescook> <878rydm56l.fsf@disp2133> <202110281136.5CE65399A7@keescook> <8735okls76.fsf@disp2133> <202110290755.451B036CE9@keescook> <87y2665sf8.fsf@disp2133> <202111030838.CB201E4@keescook> Date: Wed, 03 Nov 2021 13:35:56 -0500 In-Reply-To: <202111030838.CB201E4@keescook> (Kees Cook's message of "Wed, 3 Nov 2021 09:14:47 -0700") Message-ID: <87v9193x4j.fsf@disp2133> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.1 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-XM-SPF: eid=1miL7a-0029m0-8a;;;mid=<87v9193x4j.fsf@disp2133>;;;hst=in02.mta.xmission.com;;;ip=68.227.160.95;;;frm=ebiederm@xmission.com;;;spf=neutral X-XM-AID: U2FsdGVkX1+0WoLFfWI4hGhEwAzgOXd2H2MNf3iKiEU= X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 68.227.160.95 X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: ebiederm@xmission.com Subject: Re: selftests: seccomp_bpf failure on 5.15 X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2.1 (built Sat, 08 Feb 2020 21:53:50 +0000) X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on in02.mta.xmission.com) Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Kees Cook writes: > On Tue, Nov 02, 2021 at 01:22:19PM -0500, Eric W. Biederman wrote: >> Kees Cook writes: >> >> > On Thu, Oct 28, 2021 at 05:06:53PM -0500, Eric W. Biederman wrote: >> >> Kees Cook writes: >> >> >> >> > On Thu, Oct 28, 2021 at 12:26:26PM -0500, Eric W. Biederman wrote: >> >> >> >> Is it a problem that the debugger can see the signal if the process does >> >> not? >> > >> > Right, I'm trying to understand that too. However, my neighbor just lost >> > power. :| >> > >> > What I was in the middle of checking was what ptrace "sees" going >> > through a fatal SIGSYS; my initial debugging attempts were weird. >> >> Kees have you regained power and had a chance to see my SA_IMMUTABLE >> patch? > > Apologies; I got busy with other stuff, but I've tested this now. It's > happy and I see the expected behaviors again. Note that I used the patch > with this change: > > -#define SA_IMMUTABLE 0x008000000 > +#define SA_IMMUTABLE 0x00800000 > > Tested-by: Kees Cook Thanks. And I see you have written a test as well that should keep this kind of bug from happening again. Eric