netdev - Re: [PATCH 2/4] seccomp: add two missing ptrace ifdefines

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Thu, 19 Sep 2019 21:30:17 +0300
From:   "Dmitry V. Levin" <ldv@...linux.org>
To:     Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
Cc:     Tyler Hicks <tyhicks@...onical.com>,
        Christian Brauner <christian.brauner@...ntu.com>,
        luto@...capital.net, jannh@...gle.com, wad@...omium.org,
        shuah@...nel.org, ast@...nel.org, daniel@...earbox.net,
        kafai@...com, songliubraving@...com, yhs@...com,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org, bpf@...r.kernel.org,
        Tycho Andersen <tycho@...ho.ws>, stable@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] seccomp: add two missing ptrace ifdefines

On Thu, Sep 19, 2019 at 09:55:30AM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 19, 2019 at 01:42:51PM +0300, Dmitry V. Levin wrote:
> > On Wed, Sep 18, 2019 at 10:33:09AM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
> > > This is actually fixed in -next already (and, yes, with the Fixes line
> > > Tyler has mentioned):
> > > 
> > > https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/shuah/linux-kselftest.git/commit/?h=next&id=69b2d3c5924273a0ae968d3818210fc57a1b9d07
> > 
> > Excuse me, does it mean that you expect each selftest to be self-hosted?
> > I was (and still is) under impression that selftests should be built
> > with headers installed from the tree. Is it the case, or is it not?
> 
> As you know (but to give others some context) there is a long-standing
> bug in the selftest build environment that causes these problems (it
> isn't including the uAPI headers) which you'd proposed to be fixed
> recently[1]. Did that ever get sent as a "real" patch? I don't see it
> in Shuah's tree; can you send it to Shuah?
> 
> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20190805094719.GA1693@altlinux.org/

The [1] was an idea rather than a patch, it didn't take arch uapi headers
into account.  OK, I'll try to come up with a proper fix then.


-- 
ldv