Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2018 13:44:05 +0200 (CEST) From: Jiri Kosina <jikos@...nel.org> To: Jann Horn <jannh@...gle.com> cc: Casey Schaufler <casey.schaufler@...el.com>, Kernel Hardening <kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com>, kernel list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, linux-security-module <linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org>, selinux@...ho.nsa.gov, Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>, deneen.t.dock@...el.com, kristen@...ux.intel.com, Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...ux.intel.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 2/5] Smack: Prepare for PTRACE_MODE_SCHED On Thu, 4 Oct 2018, Jann Horn wrote: > > Well, we can't really call out into audit from scheduler code, and the > > previous versions of the patchsets didn't have PTRACE_MODE_SCHED, so it > > had to be included in PTRACE_MODE_IBPB in order to make sure we're not > > calling into audit from context switch code. > > > > Or did I misunderstand the question? > > If I understand Casey correctly, he is saying that your patch > (https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/nycvar.YFH.email@example.com/) > doesn't include PTRACE_MODE_NOAUDIT for IBPB, but the previous v6 of > your patch (https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/nycvar.YFH.firstname.lastname@example.org/) > did include it, and therefore Casey thinks that there is a specific > reason why you removed PTRACE_MODE_NOAUDIT, Quite honestly, I don't remember. I dont't think there is any deadlock that'd be triggered by this. > and therefore Casey is adding special-case logic for PTRACE_MODE_SCHED > to Smack when simply using PTRACE_MODE_NOAUDIT would also work. > > I think that Casey should change ptrace_may_access_sched() to use > "mode | PTRACE_MODE_SCHED | PTRACE_MODE_NOAUDIT". Agreed, that should work. Thanks, -- Jiri Kosina SUSE Labs
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.