[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20140725110342.GD5269@arm.com>
Date: Fri, 25 Jul 2014 12:03:42 +0100
From: Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>
To: AKASHI Takahiro <takahiro.akashi@...aro.org>
Cc: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>,
Deepak Saxena <dsaxena@...aro.org>,
Will Drewry <wad@...omium.org>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
"linaro-kernel@...ts.linaro.org" <linaro-kernel@...ts.linaro.org>,
"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
Catalin Marinas <Catalin.Marinas@....com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 1/3] arm64: ptrace: reload a syscall number after
ptrace operations
On Fri, Jul 25, 2014 at 11:36:49AM +0100, AKASHI Takahiro wrote:
> On 07/25/2014 12:01 AM, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> >>> If so, then you risk (at least) introducing
> >>>
> >>> a nice user-triggerable OOPS if audit is enabled.
> >>
> >>
> >> Can you please elaborate this?
> >> Since I didn't find any definition of audit's behavior when syscall is
> >> rewritten to -1, I thought it is reasonable to skip "exit tracing" of
> >> "skipped" syscall.
> >> (otherwise, "fake" seems to be more appropriate :)
> >
> > The audit entry hook will oops if you call it twice in a row without
> > calling the exit hook in between.
>
> Thank you, I could reproduce this problem which hits BUG(in_syscall) in
> audit_syscall_entry(). Really bad, and I fixed it in my next version and
> now a "skipped" system call is also traced by audit.
Can you reproduce this on arch/arm/ too? If so, we should also fix the code
there.
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