linux-kernel - Re: For review: seccomp_user

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]

Message-ID: <20200930151128.GD284424@cisco>
Date:   Wed, 30 Sep 2020 09:11:28 -0600
From:   Tycho Andersen <tycho@...ho.pizza>
To:     "Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)" <mtk.manpages@...il.com>
Cc:     Sargun Dhillon <sargun@...gun.me>,
        Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
        Christian Brauner <christian@...uner.io>,
        linux-man <linux-man@...r.kernel.org>,
        lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Aleksa Sarai <cyphar@...har.com>, Jann Horn <jannh@...gle.com>,
        Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>, wad@...omium.org,
        bpf@...r.kernel.org, Song Liu <songliubraving@...com>,
        Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
        Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>,
        Linux Containers <containers@...ts.linux-foundation.org>,
        Giuseppe Scrivano <gscrivan@...hat.com>,
        Robert Sesek <rsesek@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: For review: seccomp_user_notif(2) manual page

On Wed, Sep 30, 2020 at 09:03:36AM -0600, Tycho Andersen wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 30, 2020 at 01:07:38PM +0200, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote:
> >        ┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
> >        │FIXME                                                │
> >        ├─────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤
> >        │Interestingly, after the event  had  been  received, │
> >        │the  file descriptor indicates as writable (verified │
> >        │from the source code and by experiment). How is this │
> >        │useful?                                              │
> 
> You're saying it should just do EPOLLOUT and not EPOLLWRNORM? Seems
> reasonable.

If we make this change, I suppose we should also drop EPOLLRDNORM from
things which have not been received yet, since they're not really
readable.

Tycho