netdev - Re: v2 of seccomp filter c/r patches

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:	Thu, 10 Sep 2015 19:50:39 -0700
From:	Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@...il.com>
To:	Tycho Andersen <tycho.andersen@...onical.com>
Cc:	Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
	Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Will Drewry <wad@...omium.org>,
	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
	Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>,
	Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@...allels.com>,
	"Serge E. Hallyn" <serge.hallyn@...ntu.com>,
	Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-api@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: v2 of seccomp filter c/r patches

On Thu, Sep 10, 2015 at 06:20:57PM -0600, Tycho Andersen wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> Here is v2 of the seccomp filter c/r set. The patch notes have individual
> changes from the last series, but there are two points not noted:
> 
> * The series still does not allow us to correctly restore state for programs
>   that will use SECCOMP_FILTER_FLAG_TSYNC in the future. Given that we want to
>   keep seccomp_filter's identity, I think something along the lines of another
>   seccomp command like SECCOMP_INHERIT_PARENT is needed (although I'm not sure
>   if this can even be done yet). In addition, we'll need a kcmp command for
>   figuring out if filters are the same, although this too needs to compare
>   seccomp_filter objects, so it's a little screwy. Any thoughts on how to do
>   this nicely are welcome.
> 
> * I've dropped the bpf converter bug from the set and will submit it
>   separately.
> 
> Alexei mentioned that this should go via net-next to minimize cross-tree
> conflicts. Does that make sense here?

Having looked at the set again I already see conflicts in net/core/filter.c
and in linux/bpf.h with things myself and others are working on for net-next.
So I think it makes the most sense to get the whole set via net-next,
since seccomp bits look limited comparing to bpf changes.
Otherwise the merge window will be unpleasant.

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html