linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v7 1/6] arm64: ptrace: add PTRACE_SET

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20141009092358.GB3141@arm.com>
Date:	Thu, 9 Oct 2014 10:23:58 +0100
From:	Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>
To:	Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
Cc:	AKASHI Takahiro <takahiro.akashi@...aro.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 v7 1/6] arm64: ptrace: add PTRACE_SET_SYSCALL

On Wed, Oct 08, 2014 at 04:30:18PM +0100, Kees Cook wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 8, 2014 at 9:13 AM, Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com> wrote:
> > On Thu, Oct 02, 2014 at 10:46:11AM +0100, AKASHI Takahiro wrote:
> >> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/ptrace.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/ptrace.c
> >> index fe63ac5..2842f9f 100644
> >> --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/ptrace.c
> >> +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/ptrace.c
> >> @@ -1082,7 +1082,19 @@ const struct user_regset_view *task_user_regset_view(struct task_struct *task)
> >>  long arch_ptrace(struct task_struct *child, long request,
> >>                unsigned long addr, unsigned long data)
> >>  {
> >> -     return ptrace_request(child, request, addr, data);
> >> +     int ret;
> >> +
> >> +     switch (request) {
> >> +             case PTRACE_SET_SYSCALL:
> >> +                     task_pt_regs(child)->syscallno = data;
> >> +                     ret = 0;
> >> +                     break;
> >> +             default:
> >> +                     ret = ptrace_request(child, request, addr, data);
> >> +                     break;
> >> +     }
> >> +
> >> +     return ret;
> >>  }
> >
> > I still don't understand why this needs to be in arch-specific code. Can't
> > we implement this in generic code and get architectures to implement
> > something like syscall_set_nr if they want the generic interface?
> 
> Personally, I'd rather see this land as-is in the arm64 tree, and then
> later optimize PTRACE_SET_SYSCALL out of arm/ and arm64/, especially
> since only these architectures implement this at the moment.

Why? It should be really straightforward to do this in core code from the
get-go and experience shows that, if we don't do it now, it will never
happen.

> This is my plan for the asm-generic seccomp.h too -- I'd rather avoid
> touching other architectures in this series, as it's easier to review
> this way. Then we can optimize the code in a separate series, which
> will have those changes isolated, etc.

But this doesn't need to touch any other architectures...

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/