[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1502305317-85052-1-git-send-email-keescook@chromium.org>
Date: Wed, 9 Aug 2017 12:01:53 -0700
From: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
To: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
Tyler Hicks <tyhicks@...onical.com>,
Fabricio Voznika <fvoznika@...gle.com>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>,
Will Drewry <wad@...omium.org>,
Tycho Andersen <tycho@...ker.com>,
Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>, linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org,
linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org, linux-api@...r.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH v3 0/4] seccomp: Add SECCOMP_FILTER_FLAG_KILL_PROCESS
This series is the result of Fabricio and I going around a few times
on possible solutions for finding a way to enhance RET_KILL to kill
the process group. There's a lot of ways this could be done, but I
wanted something that felt cleanest. As it happens, Tyler's recent
patch series for logging improvement also needs to know a litte bit
more during filter runs, and the solution for both is to pass back
the matched filter. This lets us examine it here for RET_KILL and
in the future for logging changes.
The filter passing is patch 1, the new flag for RET_KILL is patch 2.
Some test refactoring is in patch 3 for the RET_DATA ordering, and
patch 4 is the test for the new RET_KILL flag.
One thing missing is that CRIU will likely need to be updated, since
saving/restoring seccomp filter _rules_ will not include the filter
_flags_ for a process. This can be addressed separately.
Please take a look!
Thanks,
-Kees
v3:
- adjust seccomp_run_filters() to avoid later filters from masking
kill-process RET_KILL actions (drewry)
- add test for masked RET_KILL.
v2:
- moved kill_process bool into struct padding gap (tyhicks)
- improved comments/docs in various places for clarify (tyhicks)
- use ASSERT_TRUE() for WIFEXITED and WIFSIGNALLED (tyhicks)
- adding Reviewed-bys from tyhicks
Powered by blists - more mailing lists