[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20110806132052.GE23937@htj.dyndns.org>
Date: Sat, 6 Aug 2011 15:20:52 +0200
From: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To: Andrew Lutomirski <luto@....edu>
Cc: Matt Helsley <matthltc@...ibm.com>,
Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@...allels.com>,
Nathan Lynch <ntl@...ox.com>,
Oren Laadan <orenl@...columbia.edu>,
Daniel Lezcano <dlezcano@...ibm.com>, S@....edu,
"James E.J. Bottomley" <JBottomley@...allels.com>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [EXAMPLE CODE] Parasite thread injection and TCP connection
hijacking
Hello,
On Sat, Aug 06, 2011 at 09:15:45AM -0400, Andrew Lutomirski wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 6, 2011 at 9:00 AM, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org> wrote:
> > Actually, the only thing we need on x86_64 is two bytes for the
> > syscall instruction because all params are passed through registers
> > anyway. We can just set up parameters for mmap, turn on single step,
> > point %rip to syscall in the vsyscall page. So, either way, I don't
> > think this would be too difficult to solve.
>
> Not any more -- that syscall instruction is gone as of 3.1. You could
> search through the vdso to find a syscall, but that seems fragile.
>
> Why not just add a ptrace command to issue a syscall?
Yeah, maybe. If this thing proves to be useful enough and looking for
a page to poke under proc too cumbersome. I'm not against it but
don't really see strong need either at this point.
Thanks.
--
tejun
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists