[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAGXu5jJGqNRb06i0WeUek82cAd3gHzU3gaDrsr4rmKxigiPLaA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2017 08:07:09 +0200
From: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
To: Tycho Andersen <tycho@...ker.com>
Cc: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
Chris Salls <chrissalls5@...il.com>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>,
Will Drewry <wad@...omium.org>,
"security@...nel.org" <security@...nel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] seccomp: fix the usage of get/put_seccomp_filter() in seccomp_get_filter()
On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 10:15 PM, Tycho Andersen <tycho@...ker.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Fri, Sep 22, 2017 at 05:22:29PM +0200, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
>> On 09/21, Kees Cook wrote:
>> > Can you resend the two patches; I can send the backport to -stable manually...
>>
>> Not sure I understand... Do you mean this fix + untested "introduce get_nth_filter()" ?
>
> Just want to make sure this doesn't get lost in the shuffle. If I
> resend just Oleg's patch with the added __get_secomp_filter() instead
> of open coded refcount, will that work for you Kees?
Yeah, this should be fine; thanks!
-Kees
>
> We can worry about the get_nth_filter implementation with the
> PTRACE_SECCOMP_GET_METADATA series later.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Tycho
--
Kees Cook
Pixel Security
Powered by blists - more mailing lists