linux-kernel - Re: [PATCHv7 0/3] syscalls,x86: Add execveat() system call

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Thu, 13 Nov 2014 12:13:34 -0800
From:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	David Drysdale <drysdale@...gle.com>
Cc:	Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
	Rich Felker <dalias@...ifal.cx>,
	"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
	Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>,
	Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
	Meredydd Luff <meredydd@...atehouse.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
	Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, X86 ML <x86@...nel.org>,
	linux-arch <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>,
	Linux API <linux-api@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCHv7 0/3] syscalls,x86: Add execveat() system call

On Thu, 13 Nov 2014 14:42:58 +0000 David Drysdale <drysdale@...gle.com> wrote:

> On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 9:50 PM, Andrew Morton
> <akpm@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
> > On Fri,  7 Nov 2014 17:01:01 +0000 David Drysdale <drysdale@...gle.com> wrote:
> >
> >> This patch set adds execveat(2) for x86, and is derived from Meredydd
> >> Luff's patch from Sept 2012 (https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/9/11/528).
> >>
> >> The primary aim of adding an execveat syscall is to allow an
> >> implementation of fexecve(3) that does not rely on the /proc
> >> filesystem, at least for executables (rather than scripts).  The
> >> current glibc version of fexecve(3) is implemented via /proc, which
> >> causes problems in sandboxed or otherwise restricted environments.
> >
> > Have the relevant glibc people seen/reviewed/liked this?
> 
> I think it's been mentioned in passing but not explicitly discussed over there
> (https://sourceware.org/ml/libc-alpha/2014-10/msg00497.html,
> https://sourceware.org/ml/libc-alpha/2014-10/msg00509.html)
> and a couple of the participants in that thread (Christoph Hellwig, Rich Felker)
> were also cc:ed here.
> 
> It sounded like execveat might be useful for another feature (O_EXEC) but
> I'm not sure whether that amounts to the relevant glibc folk liking this...

OK.  Could you please try to hunt down the appropriate people and give
them a poke?  We'd be in a mess if we merged this then glibc didn't use
it, or glibc developers required/suggested any interface modifications.

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/