Follow @Openwall on Twitter for new release announcements and other news
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Thu, 28 Jan 2016 19:03:57 -0800
From: Jeffrey Vander Stoep <>
To: Andy Lutomirski <>, Kees Cook <>
Cc: "" <>, Oleg Nesterov <>, 
	Will Drewry <>, "" <>, 
	Linux API <>, 
	LSM List <>, 
	"" <>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] seccomp: add SECCOMP_RET_ACK for non-fatal SIGSYS

Thanks! This is just what I need.

What are the drawbacks to returning the sigsys before executing the
system call? Otherwise this loses the benefit of properly reporting
registers for argument inspection.

How about SECCOMP_RET_PERMISSIVE? Describes the application rather
than the implementation. Otherwise preference is for

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.