Messages in this thread | | | From | "Theo de Raadt" <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH v8 0/4] Introduce mseal | Date | Fri, 02 Feb 2024 12:32:16 -0700 |
| |
> What I'm more concerned about is what happens if you call mseal() on a > range and it can mseal a portion. Like, what happens to the first vma > in your test_seal_unmapped_middle case? I see it returns an error, but > is the first VMA mseal()'ed? (no it's not, but test that)
That is correct, Liam.
Unix system calls must be atomic.
They either return an error, and that is a promise they made no changes.
Or they do the work required, and then return success.
In OpenBSD, all mimmutable() aspects were carefully studied to gaurantee this behaviour.
I am not an expert in the Linux kernel to make the assessment; someone who is qualified must make that assessment. Fuzzing with tests is a good way to judge it simpler.
| |