On Mon, Oct 29, 2018 at 3:40 PM, Tycho Andersen <tycho@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> * switch to a flags based future-proofing mechanism for struct
> seccomp_notif and seccomp_notif_resp, thus avoiding version issues
> with structure length (Kees)
[...]
>
> +struct seccomp_notif {
> + __u64 id;
> + __u32 pid;
> + __u32 flags;
> + struct seccomp_data data;
> +};
> +
> +struct seccomp_notif_resp {
> + __u64 id;
> + __s64 val;
> + __s32 error;
> + __u32 flags;
> +};
Hrm, so, what's the plan for when struct seccomp_data changes size?
I'm realizing that it might be "too late" for userspace to discover
it's running on a newer kernel. i.e. it gets a user notification, and
discovers flags it doesn't know how to handle. Do we actually need
both flags AND a length? Designing UAPI is frustrating! :)
Do we need another ioctl to discover the seccomp_data size maybe?
--
Kees Cook
_______________________________________________
Containers mailing list
Containers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers
