linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 seccomp 5/5] seccomp/cache: Report cache data through /proc/pid/seccomp

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: <CABqSeASc-3n_LXpYhb+PYkeAOsfSjih4qLMZ5t=q5yckv3w0nQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Thu, 22 Oct 2020 15:52:20 -0500
From:   YiFei Zhu <zhuyifei1999@...il.com>
To:     Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
Cc:     Linux Containers <containers@...ts.linux-foundation.org>,
        YiFei Zhu <yifeifz2@...inois.edu>, bpf <bpf@...r.kernel.org>,
        kernel list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Aleksa Sarai <cyphar@...har.com>,
        Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>,
        Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>,
        David Laight <David.Laight@...lab.com>,
        Dimitrios Skarlatos <dskarlat@...cmu.edu>,
        Giuseppe Scrivano <gscrivan@...hat.com>,
        Hubertus Franke <frankeh@...ibm.com>,
        Jack Chen <jianyan2@...inois.edu>,
        Jann Horn <jannh@...gle.com>,
        Josep Torrellas <torrella@...inois.edu>,
        Tianyin Xu <tyxu@...inois.edu>,
        Tobin Feldman-Fitzthum <tobin@....com>,
        Tycho Andersen <tycho@...ho.pizza>,
        Valentin Rothberg <vrothber@...hat.com>,
        Will Drewry <wad@...omium.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 seccomp 5/5] seccomp/cache: Report cache data through /proc/pid/seccomp_cache

On Mon, Oct 12, 2020 at 7:31 PM YiFei Zhu <zhuyifei1999@...il.com> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Oct 12, 2020 at 5:57 PM Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org> wrote:
> > I think it's fine to just have this "dangle" with a help text update of
> > "if seccomp action caching is supported by the architecture, provide the
> > /proc/$pid ..."
>
> I think it would be weird if someone sees this help text and wonder...
> "hmm does my architecture support seccomp action caching" and without
> a clear pointer to how seccomp action cache works, goes and compiles
> the kernel with this config option on for the purpose of knowing if
> their arch supports it... Or, is it a common practice in the kernel to
> leave dangling configs?

Bump, in case this question was missed. I don't really want to miss
the 5.10 merge window...

YiFei Zhu