Sorry for the late reply, I had a (very nice!) laser eye surgery last week :)
> I'm not sure about your clone issue, but wrt execve, I know there
> may be some discrepancy when exec turns a non-compat executable into
> a compat one and vice-versa. Do you exec a binary with a different
> bitness, and therefore a different syscall table, on return from exec ?
I double checked, and it seems like we are calling normal 64bit executables.
To test, I just used a simple C script that when run without arguments,
calls itself with execve + 1 argument (to avoid the recursion),
therefore a 64bit executable that calls another 64bit executable.
Unfortunately the issue is still present.
Thanks for the hint though, it was very helpful!
Federico
Il giorno mar 8 mar 2022 alle ore 16:01 Mathieu Desnoyers
<mathieu.desnoyers@xxxxxxxxxxxx> ha scritto:
>
> ----- On Mar 8, 2022, at 5:11 AM, Federico Di Pierro nierro92@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
>
> > Hi everyone,
> >
> > While testing Falco on arm64 my team and I encountered some weird
> > issues; basically, it seems like execve() exit tracepoint is never
> > called.
> > Moreover, the clone() exit tracepoint referred to the child process is
> > also missing.
> > The issue is present on both the kmod and eBPF probe.
> >
> > I tested on amznlinux2 with kernel 5.10.96-90.460.amzn2.aarch64, but
> > other team members tested on other kernel versions too (down to
> > 4.14.X).
> > I was also able to reproduce the problem using bpftrace tool: hooking
> > on tracepoint:syscalls:sys_exit_execve; no event is received:
> >
> > bpftrace -e 'tracepoint:syscalls:sys_exit_execve { printf("execve!\n"); }'
> >
> > Since sys_enter tracepoints are indeed called, we'd expect the
> > sys_exit ones to be called too, just like it happens on x86.
> > The question is: are we missing anything obvious here?
>
> I'm not sure about your clone issue, but wrt execve, I know there
> may be some discrepancy when exec turns a non-compat executable into
> a compat one and vice-versa. Do you exec a binary with a different
> bitness, and therefore a different syscall table, on return from exec ?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Mathieu
>
>
> >
> > Thank you very much for your time,
> > Regards
> > Federico
>
> --
> Mathieu Desnoyers
> EfficiOS Inc.
> http://www.efficios.com
|