lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2015]   [Jun]   [9]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH v2] seccomp: add ptrace options for suspend/resume
Hi Kees, Andy,

On Fri, Jun 05, 2015 at 11:16:50PM +0200, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> Hi Tycho,
>
> On 06/04, Tycho Andersen wrote:
> > > > +#ifdef CONFIG_CHECKPOINT_RESTORE
> > > > +bool may_suspend_seccomp(void)
> > > > +{
> > > > + if (!capable(CAP_SYS_ADMIN))
> > > > + return false;
> > > > +
> > > > + if (current->seccomp.mode != SECCOMP_MODE_DISABLED)
> > > > + return false;
> > >
> > > Heh. OK, I won't argue with the new check too ;)
> >
> > Actually now that I think about it I agree with you, these checks
> > don't seem necessary. Even inside a user namespace, if you can ptrace
> > a process you can make it do whatever you want irrespective of
> > seccomp, as long as it has the necessary capabilities. Once the
> > seccomp checks are run after ptrace, they'll be enforced so you
> > couldn't have it call whatever you want in the first place.
>
> Good ;)
>
> > Still, perhaps I'm missing something...
>
> Kees, Andy?

Any thoughts on removing may_suspend_seccomp() all together?

I sent v3 with this still in it, but I can send v4 without it if we
are all in agreement.

Tycho


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2015-06-09 23:41    [W:0.083 / U:0.492 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site