[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAGXu5jLcbWDJiLbpejJTERbV2CkCk2dVZ7jwq7Xw_jYUicBFjQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 16 Jul 2014 14:57:20 -0700
From: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
To: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Will Drewry <wad@...omium.org>,
James Morris <james.l.morris@...cle.com>,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
"x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>,
"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
Linux MIPS Mailing List <linux-mips@...ux-mips.org>,
linux-arch <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-security-module <linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org>,
Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...mgrid.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/7] x86: Split syscall_trace_enter into two phases
On Wed, Jul 16, 2014 at 2:15 PM, Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net> wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 16, 2014 at 1:21 PM, Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org> wrote:
>> On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 12:32 PM, Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net> wrote:
>>>
>>> +
>>> + ret = seccomp_phase1(&sd);
>>> + if (ret == SECCOMP_PHASE1_SKIP) {
>>> + regs->orig_ax = -ENOSYS;
>>
>> Before, seccomp didn't touch orig_ax on a skip. I don't see any
>> problem with this, and it's probably more clear this way, but are you
>> sure there aren't unexpected side-effects from this?
>
> It's necessary to cause the syscall to be skipped -- see syscall_trace_enter.
>
> That being said, setting it to -ENOSYS is nonsense and probably
> confused you at least as much as it confused me. It should be
> regs->orig_ax = -1.
Yes, I think that would be better.
-Kees
--
Kees Cook
Chrome OS Security
--
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