[lkml]   [2012]   [May]   [24]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: [RFC PATCH 0/3] move the secure_computing call
    On 05/24/2012 04:43 PM, Andrew Lutomirski wrote:
    > IMO the behavior should change. Alternatively, a post-ptrace syscall
    > should have to pass the *tracer's* seccomp filter, but that seems
    > overcomplicated and confusing.
    > OTOH, allowing ptrace in a seccomp filter is asking for trouble anyway
    > -- if you can ptrace something outside the sandbox, you've escaped.

    This is my suggestion: if there is demand, make it possible to install a
    *second* seccomp filter program which is run on the result of the
    ptrace. I.e.:

    Untraced: process -> seccomp1 -> kernel

    Traced: process -> seccomp1 -> ptrace -> seccomp2 -> kernel

    This is something we could add later if there is demand.


     \ /
      Last update: 2012-05-25 02:21    [W:0.039 / U:13.856 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site