[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAO_48GFi4TRGDtqo8aPPerpQG5ei+dszrGq_0_t_8A2G-03rvQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2017 21:48:19 +0530
From: Sumit Semwal <sumit.semwal@...aro.org>
To: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>, luto@...capital.net
Cc: Brian Norris <computersforpeace@...il.com>, mcgrof@...nel.org,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, stable@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org, Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>
Subject: seccomp ptrace selftest failures with 4.4-stable [Was: Re: LTS
testing with latest kselftests - some failures]
Hi Kees, Andy,
On 15 June 2017 at 23:26, Sumit Semwal <sumit.semwal@...aro.org> wrote:
> 3. 'seccomp ptrace hole closure' patches got added in 4.7 [3] -
> feature and test together.
> - This one also seems like a security hole being closed, and the
> 'feature' could be a candidate for stable backports, but Arnd tried
> that, and it was quite non-trivial. So perhaps we'll need some help
> from the subsystem developers here.
Could you please help us sort this out? Our goal is to help Greg with
testing stable kernels, and currently the seccomp tests fail due to
missing feature (seccomp ptrace hole closure) getting tested via
latest kselftest.
If you feel the feature isn't a stable candidate, then could you
please help make the test degrade gracefully in its absence?
Greatly appreciated!
Thanks and best regards,
Sumit
Powered by blists - more mailing lists