linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v1] seccomp: simplify secure

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]

Date:   Thu, 10 Oct 2019 14:53:24 -0700
From:   Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
To:     Christian Brauner <christian.brauner@...ntu.com>
Cc:     linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-parisc@...r.kernel.org, linux-s390@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-um@...ts.infradead.org, luto@...nel.org, oleg@...hat.com,
        tglx@...utronix.de, wad@...omium.org, x86@...nel.org,
        Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1] seccomp: simplify secure_computing()

On Tue, Sep 24, 2019 at 08:44:20AM +0200, Christian Brauner wrote:
> Afaict, the struct seccomp_data argument to secure_computing() is unused
> by all current callers. So let's remove it.
> The argument was added in [1]. It was added because having the arch
> supply the syscall arguments used to be faster than having it done by
> secure_computing() (cf. Andy's comment in [2]). This is not true anymore
> though.

Yes; thanks for cleaning this up!

> diff --git a/arch/s390/kernel/ptrace.c b/arch/s390/kernel/ptrace.c
> index ad71132374f0..ed80bdfbf5fe 100644
> --- a/arch/s390/kernel/ptrace.c
> +++ b/arch/s390/kernel/ptrace.c
> @@ -439,7 +439,7 @@ static int poke_user(struct task_struct *child, addr_t addr, addr_t data)
>  long arch_ptrace(struct task_struct *child, long request,
>  		 unsigned long addr, unsigned long data)
>  {
> -	ptrace_area parea; 
> +	ptrace_area parea;
>  	int copied, ret;
>  
>  	switch (request) {

If this were whitespace cleanup in kernel/seccomp.c, I'd take it without
flinching. As this is only tangentially related and in an arch
directory, I've dropped this hunk out of a cowardly fear of causing
(a likely very unlikely) merge conflict.

I'd rather we globally clean up trailing whitespace at the end of -rc1
and ask Linus to run some crazy script. :)

So, with that hunk removed, I've applied this to for-next/seccomp. :)

Thanks!

-- 
Kees Cook