lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2012]   [Jan]   [18]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    SubjectRe: Compat 32-bit syscall entry from 64-bit task!?
    From
    On Wed, Jan 18, 2012 at 1:47 PM, Linus Torvalds
    <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> wrote:
    > On Wed, Jan 18, 2012 at 11:44 AM, Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org> wrote:
    >>
    >> It can securely enable syscall auditing which can catch all syscalls
    >> (however you only get race free memory arguments for the ones with LSM hooks
    >> at the right place). Really need both.
    >>
    >> I agree it's not easy to get tight (and also not pretty), but you have a lot
    >> better chance doing it this way than with ptrace.
    >
    > .. And how the f*^& did you imagine that something like chrome would do that?
    >
    > You need massive amounts of privileges, and it's a total disaster in
    > every single respect.
    >
    > Stop pushing crap. No, ptrace isn't wonderful, but your LSM+auditing
    > idea is a billion times worse in all respects.
    >
    > We can definitely fix the ptrace issue with compat system calls.

    FWIW, it looks like audit needs fixing too. If a process only uses
    TIF_SYSCALL_AUDIT, then the fast-path will properly annotate the entry
    with AUDIT_ARCH_I386, but if it takes the slow path because of some
    other tracing on a thread (ftrace, ptrace, ...), then the audit record
    will incorrectly use TIF_IA32 to write the audit record. Easy patch
    (I'll write it up shortly), but yet another case of breakage.


    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2012-01-18 20:55    [W:4.272 / U:0.288 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site