[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2012 16:43:40 -0800
From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To: Will Drewry <wad@...omium.org>
CC: Markus Gutschke <markus@...omium.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-arch@...r.kernel.org, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
x86@...nel.org, arnd@...db.de, davem@...emloft.net, mingo@...hat.com,
oleg@...hat.com, peterz@...radead.org, rdunlap@...otime.net,
mcgrathr@...omium.org, tglx@...utronix.de, luto@....edu,
eparis@...hat.com, serge.hallyn@...onical.com, djm@...drot.org,
scarybeasts@...il.com, indan@....nu, pmoore@...hat.com,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org, corbet@....net, eric.dumazet@...il.com,
keescook@...omium.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 3/8] seccomp: add system call filtering using BPF
On 02/16/2012 03:00 PM, Will Drewry wrote:
>
> Without the addition of x32, it is still the intersection of
> is_compat_task()/TS_COMPAT and CONFIG_64BIT for all arches to
> determine if the call is 32-bit or 64-bit, but this will add another
> wrinkle. Would it make sense to assume that system call namespaces
> may be ever expanding and offer up an unsigned integer value?
>
This is definitely the most general solution.
By the way, although most processes only use one set of system calls,
there are legitimate reasons for cross-mode tasks, and those probably
have a high overlap with the ones that would benefit from this kind of
filtering facility, e.g. pin.
-hpa
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
