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 PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2014 15:24:58 +0000 From: Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com> To: AKASHI Takahiro <takahiro.akashi@...aro.org> Cc: "wad@...omium.org" <wad@...omium.org>, Catalin Marinas <Catalin.Marinas@....com>, "dsaxena@...aro.org" <dsaxena@...aro.org>, "arndb@...db.de" <arndb@...db.de>, "linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>, "linaro-kernel@...ts.linaro.org" <linaro-kernel@...ts.linaro.org>, "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/3] arm64: Add seccomp support On Thu, Mar 06, 2014 at 02:34:46AM +0000, AKASHI Takahiro wrote: > On 03/01/2014 02:20 AM, Will Deacon wrote: > > On Tue, Feb 25, 2014 at 09:20:24AM +0000, AKASHI Takahiro wrote: > > I'm slightly surprised that we do the secure computing check first. Doesn't > > this allow a debugger to change the syscall to something else after we've > > decided that it's ok? > > To be honest, I just followed other architectures' implementation. > Can you elaborate any use case that you have in your mind? My initial thought was that we should do the secure_computing check *after* the debugger has finished messing around with the registers. However, I suppose you'd have had to enable ptrace in your seccompd filter for that scenario to occur, so there's probably not an issue here after all. Will -- 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