Messages in this thread Patch in this message | | | Date | Wed, 6 Nov 2013 13:26:52 -0800 | Subject | Re: [libseccomp-discuss] ARM audit, seccomp, etc are broken wrt OABI syscalls | From | Kees Cook <> |
| |
On Wed, Nov 6, 2013 at 1:20 PM, Will Drewry <wad@chromium.org> wrote: > On Wed, Nov 6, 2013 at 9:51 AM, Russell King - ARM Linux > <linux@arm.linux.org.uk> wrote: >> On Wed, Nov 06, 2013 at 10:32:31AM -0500, Eric Paris wrote: >>> On Tue, 2013-11-05 at 14:36 -0800, Andy Lutomirski wrote: >>> > 1. Set a different audit arch for OABI syscalls (e.g. >>> > AUDIT_ARCH_ARMOABI). That is, treat OABI syscall entries the same way >>> > that x86_64 treats int 80. >>> >>> As the audit maintainer, I like #1. It might break ABI, but the ABI is >>> flat wrong now and not maintainable... >> >> If you read the whole thread, you will see that this corner case is just >> not worth the effort to support. Audit may as well be disabled by >> kernel config if any OABI support is enabled. > > This might be the best move for seccomp too (as Kees suggested). I'd > love to have audit arch visibility, but it's not clear that it's worth > any sort of larger changes ... > > ... like adding a task_thread_info.compat flag that bubbles up to > syscall_get_arch(), or if we assume consumers of syscall_get_nr() are > broken today (I haven't checked), then it would be possible to at > least re-add the 0x900000 bits, if compat, before handing back the > system call number but leave the audit arch pieces alone.
How does this look, for the seccomp part?
-Kees
diff --git a/arch/Kconfig b/arch/Kconfig index af2cc6eabcc7..3610c2d9910f 100644 --- a/arch/Kconfig +++ b/arch/Kconfig @@ -331,7 +331,7 @@ config HAVE_ARCH_SECCOMP_FILTER
config SECCOMP_FILTER def_bool y - depends on HAVE_ARCH_SECCOMP_FILTER && SECCOMP && NET + depends on HAVE_ARCH_SECCOMP_FILTER && SECCOMP && NET && !OABI_COMPAT help Enable tasks to build secure computing environments defined in terms of Berkeley Packet Filter programs which implement
-- Kees Cook Chrome OS Security
| |