| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <20090506212913.GC4861@elte.hu> Date: Wed, 6 May 2009 23:29:13 +0200 From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu> To: Markus Gutschke (顧孟勤) <markus@...gle.com> Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>, Roland McGrath <roland@...hat.com>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, x86@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, stable@...nel.org, linux-mips@...ux-mips.org, sparclinux@...r.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@...abs.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] x86-64: seccomp: fix 32/64 syscall hole * Markus Gutschke (顧孟勤) <markus@...gle.com> wrote: > On Sat, Feb 28, 2009 at 10:23, Linus Torvalds > <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> wrote: > > And I guess the seccomp interaction means that this is > > potentially a 2.6.29 thing. Not that I know whether anybody > > actually _uses_ seccomp. It does seem to be enabled in at least > > Fedora kernels, but it might not be used anywhere. > > In the Linux version of Google Chrome, we are currently working on > code that will use seccomp for parts of our sandboxing solution. That's a pretty interesting usage. What would be fallback mode you are using if the kernel doesnt have seccomp built in? Completely non-sandboxed? Or a ptrace/PTRACE_SYSCALL based sandbox? Ingo -- 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists