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
| ||
|
Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2012 00:36:35 +0100 From: Denys Vlasenko <vda.linux@...glemail.com> To: Pedro Alves <palves@...hat.com> Cc: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>, Indan Zupancic <indan@....nu>, Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>, Jamie Lokier <jamie@...reable.org>, Andrew Lutomirski <luto@....edu>, Will Drewry <wad@...omium.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, keescook@...omium.org, john.johansen@...onical.com, serge.hallyn@...onical.com, coreyb@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, pmoore@...hat.com, eparis@...hat.com, djm@...drot.org, segoon@...nwall.com, rostedt@...dmis.org, jmorris@...ei.org, scarybeasts@...il.com, avi@...hat.com, penberg@...helsinki.fi, viro@...iv.linux.org.uk, mingo@...e.hu, akpm@...ux-foundation.org, khilman@...com, borislav.petkov@....com, amwang@...hat.com, ak@...ux.intel.com, eric.dumazet@...il.com, gregkh@...e.de, dhowells@...hat.com, daniel.lezcano@...e.fr, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org, olofj@...omium.org, mhalcrow@...gle.com, dlaor@...hat.com, Roland McGrath <mcgrathr@...omium.org> Subject: Re: Compat 32-bit syscall entry from 64-bit task!? On Wednesday 25 January 2012 21:20, Pedro Alves wrote: > On 01/25/2012 07:36 PM, Oleg Nesterov wrote: > > > > Not sure this is really better, but there is another idea. Currently we > > have PTRACE_O_TRACESYSGOOD to avoid the confusion with the real SIGTRAP. > > Perhaps we can add PTRACE_O_TRACESYS_VERY_GOOD (or we can look at > > PT_SEIZED instead) and report TS_COMPAT via ptrace_report_syscall ? > > May I beg to don't rely on PTRACE_SYSCALL for anything new? This doesn't *add* anything new. All the same ptrace stops will happen at exactly the same moments. No new stops added. We only add a value into upper half of waitpid status: (status >> 16) used to be 0 on syscall entry. Now it will be PTRACE_EVENT_SYSCALL_ENTRY[1]. That's all. > You can't PTRACE_SINGLESTEP and PTRACE_SYSCALL simultaneously. This is an orthogonal problem. -- vda -- 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