[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1501730353-46840-2-git-send-email-keescook@chromium.org>
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2017 20:19:10 -0700
From: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
To: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
Fabricio Voznika <fvoznika@...gle.com>,
Tyler Hicks <tyhicks@...onical.com>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>,
Will Drewry <wad@...omium.org>, Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>,
linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org,
linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH 1/4] seccomp: Provide matching filter for introspection
Both the upcoming logging improvements and changes to RET_KILL will need
to know which filter a given seccomp return value originated from. In
order to delay logic processing of result until after the seccomp loop,
this adds a single pointer assignment on matches. This will allow both
log and RET_KILL logic to work off the filter rather than doing more
expensive tests inside the time-critical run_filters loop.
Running tight cycles of getpid() with filters attached shows no measurable
difference in speed.
Suggested-by: Tyler Hicks <tyhicks@...onical.com>
Signed-off-by: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
---
kernel/seccomp.c | 11 ++++++++---
1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/seccomp.c b/kernel/seccomp.c
index 98b59b5db90b..8bdcf01379e4 100644
--- a/kernel/seccomp.c
+++ b/kernel/seccomp.c
@@ -171,10 +171,12 @@ static int seccomp_check_filter(struct sock_filter *filter, unsigned int flen)
/**
* seccomp_run_filters - evaluates all seccomp filters against @sd
* @sd: optional seccomp data to be passed to filters
+ * @match: stores struct seccomp_filter that resulted in the return value
*
* Returns valid seccomp BPF response codes.
*/
-static u32 seccomp_run_filters(const struct seccomp_data *sd)
+static u32 seccomp_run_filters(const struct seccomp_data *sd,
+ struct seccomp_filter **match)
{
struct seccomp_data sd_local;
u32 ret = SECCOMP_RET_ALLOW;
@@ -198,8 +200,10 @@ static u32 seccomp_run_filters(const struct seccomp_data *sd)
for (; f; f = f->prev) {
u32 cur_ret = BPF_PROG_RUN(f->prog, sd);
- if ((cur_ret & SECCOMP_RET_ACTION) < (ret & SECCOMP_RET_ACTION))
+ if ((cur_ret & SECCOMP_RET_ACTION) < (ret & SECCOMP_RET_ACTION)) {
ret = cur_ret;
+ *match = f;
+ }
}
return ret;
}
@@ -566,6 +570,7 @@ static int __seccomp_filter(int this_syscall, const struct seccomp_data *sd,
const bool recheck_after_trace)
{
u32 filter_ret, action;
+ struct seccomp_filter *match = NULL;
int data;
/*
@@ -574,7 +579,7 @@ static int __seccomp_filter(int this_syscall, const struct seccomp_data *sd,
*/
rmb();
- filter_ret = seccomp_run_filters(sd);
+ filter_ret = seccomp_run_filters(sd, &match);
data = filter_ret & SECCOMP_RET_DATA;
action = filter_ret & SECCOMP_RET_ACTION;
--
2.7.4
Powered by blists - more mailing lists