linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 0/4] seccomp trap to userspace

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

Date:   Mon, 6 Aug 2018 19:57:16 -0700
From:   Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>
To:     Tycho Andersen <tycho@...ho.ws>
Cc:     Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        containers@...ts.linux-foundation.org, linux-api@...r.kernel.org,
        Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
        "Eric W . Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
        "Serge E . Hallyn" <serge@...lyn.com>,
        Christian Brauner <christian.brauner@...ntu.com>,
        Tyler Hicks <tyhicks@...onical.com>,
        Akihiro Suda <suda.akihiro@....ntt.co.jp>,
        "Tobin C . Harding" <me@...in.cc>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 0/4] seccomp trap to userspace


> On Aug 6, 2018, at 7:44 PM, Tycho Andersen <tycho@...ho.ws> wrote:
> 
> Hi all,
> 
> Dinesh Subhraveti has claimed that some part of this series might be
> patented. While he has not furnished me with anything to confirm this
> claim, I'll put this series on hold.

That... is utterly ridiculous. Does LF have a mechanism to figure out wtf and deal with it by, for example, filing for ex parte review.

Every microkernel ever should strongly resemble prior art.

> 
> Tycho
> 
>> On Thu, Jun 21, 2018 at 04:04:12PM -0600, Tycho Andersen wrote:
>> Hi all,
>> 
>> Here's v4 of the seccomp trap to userspace series. v3 is here:
>> https://lkml.org/lkml/2018/5/31/527
>> 
>> I believe we've addressed the two burning questions I had about v3: 1.
>> it seems ok not to use netlink, since there's not a great way to re-use
>> the API without a lot of unnecessary code and 2. only having return
>> capability for fds seems fine with people. Or at least I haven't heard
>> any strong objections.
>> 
>> I've re-worked a bunch of things in this version based on feedback from
>> the last series. See patch notes for details. At this point I'm not
>> aware of anything that needs to be addressed, but of course that is
>> subject to change :)
>> 
>> Tycho
>> 
>> Tycho Andersen (4):
>>  seccomp: add a return code to trap to userspace
>>  seccomp: make get_nth_filter available outside of CHECKPOINT_RESTORE
>>  seccomp: add a way to get a listener fd from ptrace
>>  seccomp: add support for passing fds via USER_NOTIF
>> 
>> .../userspace-api/seccomp_filter.rst          |  79 +++
>> arch/Kconfig                                  |   7 +
>> include/linux/seccomp.h                       |  18 +-
>> include/uapi/linux/ptrace.h                   |   2 +
>> include/uapi/linux/seccomp.h                  |  23 +-
>> kernel/ptrace.c                               |   4 +
>> kernel/seccomp.c                              | 491 ++++++++++++++-
>> tools/testing/selftests/seccomp/seccomp_bpf.c | 560 +++++++++++++++++-
>> 8 files changed, 1172 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
>> 
>> -- 
>> 2.17.1
>>