Messages in this thread | | | From | Paul Moore <> | Subject | Re: [libseccomp-discuss] [PATCH v2] seccomp: not compatible with ARM OABI | Date | Fri, 08 Nov 2013 13:23:53 -0500 |
| |
On Friday, November 08, 2013 08:39:29 AM Andy Lutomirski wrote: > On Fri, Nov 8, 2013 at 8:29 AM, Paul Moore <pmoore@redhat.com> wrote: > > On Thursday, November 07, 2013 11:05:26 AM Andy Lutomirski wrote: > >> On Thu, Nov 7, 2013 at 10:56 AM, Eric Paris <eparis@redhat.com> wrote: > >> > Isn't x32 similarly screwy? Does it work because the syscall numbers > >> > are different? > >> > >> Yes (from reading the code -- I haven't actually tried it). > > > > I've got a x32 VM that I boot occasionally to test seccomp/libseccomp. > > For the purposes of seccomp it looks exactly like x86_64, including > > sharing the same AUDIT_ARCH_X86_64 value, the only difference being the > > syscall number offset ... Assuming you're using kernel 3.9 or later. > > Previous kernels had a bug which stripped the x32 syscall offset so it was > > impossible to distinguish from x86_64 and x32 with seccomp. See the > > following commit for the details: > > Ooh -- where did you get this? (I imagine I could debootstrap such a > beast and then just chroot / nspawn / schroot in, but if there are > readily available images, that would be great. Fedora doesn't seem to > have much x32 support.)
I built up a small Gentoo image:
* http://distfiles.gentoo.org/releases/amd64/current-stage3
-- paul moore security and virtualization @ redhat
| |