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: Tue, 24 Jun 2014 21:18:15 +0200 From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com> To: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org> Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>, Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...mgrid.com>, "Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)" <mtk.manpages@...il.com>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, Daniel Borkmann <dborkman@...hat.com>, Will Drewry <wad@...omium.org>, Julien Tinnes <jln@...omium.org>, David Drysdale <drysdale@...gle.com>, linux-api@...r.kernel.org, x86@...nel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-mips@...ux-mips.org, linux-arch@...r.kernel.org, linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 4/9] seccomp: move no_new_privs into seccomp On 06/23, Kees Cook wrote: > > --- a/include/linux/seccomp.h > +++ b/include/linux/seccomp.h > @@ -3,6 +3,8 @@ > > #include <uapi/linux/seccomp.h> > > +#define SECCOMP_FLAG_NO_NEW_PRIVS 0 /* task may not gain privs */ > + > #ifdef CONFIG_SECCOMP > > #include <linux/thread_info.h> > @@ -16,6 +18,7 @@ struct seccomp_filter; > * system calls available to a process. > * @filter: must always point to a valid seccomp-filter or NULL as it is > * accessed without locking during system call entry. > + * @flags: flags under task->sighand->siglock lock > * > * @filter must only be accessed from the context of current as there > * is no read locking. > @@ -23,6 +26,7 @@ struct seccomp_filter; > struct seccomp { > int mode; > struct seccomp_filter *filter; > + unsigned long flags; > }; > > extern int __secure_computing(int); > @@ -51,7 +55,9 @@ static inline int seccomp_mode(struct seccomp *s) > > #include <linux/errno.h> > > -struct seccomp { }; > +struct seccomp { > + unsigned long flags; > +}; A bit messy ;) I am wondering if we can simply do static inline bool current_no_new_privs(void) { if (current->no_new_privs) return true; #ifdef CONFIG_SECCOMP if (test_thread_flag(TIF_SECCOMP)) return true; #endif return false; return test_bit(SECCOMP_FLAG_NO_NEW_PRIVS, &p->seccomp.flags); } instead ? Oleg. -- 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