On Thu, Jun 9, 2016 at 2:01 PM, Kees Cook <keescook@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > When RET_TRACE triggers, a tracer may change a syscall into something that > should be filtered by seccomp. This re-runs seccomp after a trace event > to make sure things continue to pass. > > Signed-off-by: Kees Cook <keescook@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > Cc: Andy Lutomirski <luto@xxxxxxxxxx> > --- > kernel/seccomp.c | 21 ++++++++++++++++++--- > 1 file changed, 18 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/kernel/seccomp.c b/kernel/seccomp.c > index 14a37d71b612..54d15eb2b701 100644 > --- a/kernel/seccomp.c > +++ b/kernel/seccomp.c > @@ -556,7 +556,8 @@ void secure_computing_strict(int this_syscall) > #else > > #ifdef CONFIG_SECCOMP_FILTER > -static int __seccomp_filter(int this_syscall, const struct seccomp_data *sd) > +static int __seccomp_filter(int this_syscall, const struct seccomp_data *sd, > + const bool recheck_after_trace) This patch looks good with one minor nit: I read this as "pass true if you want to recheck after trace", which is exactly the opposite of how it works. --Andy -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-arch" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
