Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 2 Mar 2012 09:12:58 +0100 | Subject | Re: [PATCH v12 06/13] seccomp: add system call filtering using BPF | From | "Indan Zupancic" <> |
| |
On Fri, March 2, 2012 07:55, H. Peter Anvin wrote: > On 03/01/2012 10:43 PM, Indan Zupancic wrote: > Ok, fail on my part - I misread the above to refer to @arch, not > @instruction_pointer.
Ah, that explains a lot.
>>> -- Pin is a great example. >> Is that http://www.pintool.org/? >> >> Can you explain how knowing the IP is useful for Pin? >> >> All I am asking for is just one use case for providing the IP. Is that >> asking for too much? > > However, it still applies. For something like Pin, Pin may want to trap > on all or a subset from the instrumented program, while the > instrumentation code -- which lives in the same address space -- needs > to execute those same instructions. > > Yes, it's useless for *security* (unless perhaps if you keep very strict > tabs on the flow of control by using debug registers, dynamic > translation or whatnot), but it can be highly useful for > *instrumentation*, where you want to analyze the behavior of a > non-malicious program.
That is a good use case indeed, I'm convinced.
Thanks,
Indan
| |