linux-kernel - Re: [RFC][PATCH] seccomp: add SECCOMP_RET

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: <CABXk95CvE7O8ZL864AoVtKA7XqA_XaxA66Zz5ncpDWFSO7C19Q@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Thu, 28 Jan 2016 19:03:57 -0800
From:	Jeffrey Vander Stoep <jeffv@...gle.com>
To:	Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>,
	Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
Cc:	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
	Will Drewry <wad@...omium.org>,
	"linux-doc@...r.kernel.org" <linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>,
	Linux API <linux-api@...r.kernel.org>,
	LSM List <linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org>,
	"kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com" 
	<kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] seccomp: add SECCOMP_RET_ACK for non-fatal SIGSYS

Thanks! This is just what I need.

What are the drawbacks to returning the sigsys before executing the
system call? Otherwise this loses the benefit of properly reporting
registers for argument inspection.

How about SECCOMP_RET_PERMISSIVE? Describes the application rather
than the implementation. Otherwise preference is for
SECCOMP_RET_ALLOW_SIGSYS.