From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754628Ab2I0Tke (ORCPT ); Thu, 27 Sep 2012 15:40:34 -0400 Received: from mail-we0-f174.google.com ([74.125.82.174]:37721 "EHLO mail-we0-f174.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754330Ab2I0Tkc (ORCPT ); Thu, 27 Sep 2012 15:40:32 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20120927173622.GB21025@kroah.com> References: <20120927173622.GB21025@kroah.com> From: Andy Lutomirski Date: Thu, 27 Sep 2012 12:40:10 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH 3.5 0/2] seccomp and vsyscall fixes To: Greg KH Cc: Linus Torvalds , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Will Drewry , Kees Cook , James Morris Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org [cc James Morris] This has been pending since the 3.6 merge window. Patch 2/2 barely matters because it's almost impossible to detect its effect -- it's more about future proofing against new architectures. Patch 1/2 has been slightly tweaked here: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/%3C744e07394a02be3d3ef52c22ccedb24d9a478fe1.1343869850.git.luto@amacapital.net%3E and will soon appear here (once the cache refreshes) https://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/luto/linux.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/heads/seccomp-vsyscall/patch_v2 I can wait for someone to pick it up or I can send a pull request from my tree. FWIW, the same patch applies cleanly to -next. --Andy On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 10:36 AM, Greg KH wrote: > On Tue, Jul 17, 2012 at 04:19:18PM -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote: >> Apologies for the lateness of this stuff. I was at a conference last >> week when the Chrome issue was discovered and I couldn't do this >> properly until I got back. >> >> Will, can you confirm that this version is okay and passes your tests? >> It passes mine. >> >> While there are no known seccomp users that will have trouble, >> SECCOMP_RET_TRAP and SECCOMP_RET_TRACE currently interact oddly with >> emulated vsyscalls. This might lead to ABI issues down the road (if >> something starts to rely on current behavior) or unexpected malfunctions >> (if something tries to change, say, sys_gettimeofday, into a different >> syscall and gets completely bogus results on a vsyscall-using distro. >> >> It's unlikely that fixing this later will cause issues, but it would be >> nice to nail down and document the vsyscall quirks for the first >> released kernel with seccomp mode 2 support. >> >> (Patch 2/2 is very much optional. It fixes a strange corner case. It >> ought to be fine for 3.6, since I very much doubt that any real code >> will hit that corner case and cause ABI problems.) >> >> Andy Lutomirski (2): >> seccomp: Make syscall skipping and nr changes more consistent >> seccomp: Future-proof against silly tracers >> >> Documentation/prctl/seccomp_filter.txt | 74 ++++++++++++++++++++-- >> arch/x86/include/asm/syscall.h | 11 +++ >> arch/x86/kernel/vsyscall_64.c | 110 +++++++++++++++++--------------- >> kernel/seccomp.c | 28 +++++++- >> 4 files changed, 163 insertions(+), 60 deletions(-) > > What ever happened to these patches? I don't see them in 3.6-rc7, are > they pending for 3.7? > > thanks, > > greg k-h -- Andy Lutomirski AMA Capital Management, LLC