From: Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>
To: Christian Brauner <christian.brauner@canonical.com>
Cc: Tycho Andersen <tycho@tycho.ws>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Linux Containers <containers@lists.linux-foundation.org>,
Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>,
"Eric W . Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>,
"Serge E . Hallyn" <serge@hallyn.com>,
Christian Brauner <christian.brauner@ubuntu.com>,
Tyler Hicks <tyhicks@canonical.com>,
Akihiro Suda <suda.akihiro@lab.ntt.co.jp>
Subject: Re: [RFC 0/3] seccomp trap to userspace
Date: Thu, 15 Mar 2018 16:56:12 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CALCETrVnvbZLx5v=DMu2N1JtR+ys507X5CYBi-qQnus3VMQdwg@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180315160924.GA12744@gmail.com>
On Thu, Mar 15, 2018 at 4:09 PM, Christian Brauner
<christian.brauner@canonical.com> wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 04, 2018 at 11:49:43AM +0100, Tycho Andersen wrote:
>> Several months ago at Linux Plumber's, we had a discussion about adding a
>> feature to seccomp which would allow seccomp to trigger a notification for some
>> other process. Here's a draft of that feature.
>>
>> Patch 1 contains the bulk of it, patches 2 & 3 offer an alternative way to
>> acquire the fd that receives notifications via ptrace (the method in patch 1
>> poses some problems). Other suggestions for how to acquire one of these fds
>> would be welcome.
>>
>> Take a close look at the synchronization. I think I've got it right, but I
>> probably don't :)
>>
>> Thanks!
>>
>> Tycho Andersen (3):
>> seccomp: add a return code to trap to userspace
>> seccomp: hoist out filter resolving logic
>> seccomp: add a way to get a listener fd from ptrace
>>
>> arch/Kconfig | 7 +
>> include/linux/seccomp.h | 14 +-
>> include/uapi/linux/ptrace.h | 1 +
>> include/uapi/linux/seccomp.h | 18 +-
>> kernel/ptrace.c | 4 +
>> kernel/seccomp.c | 467 ++++++++++++++++++++++++--
>> tools/testing/selftests/seccomp/seccomp_bpf.c | 180 +++++++++-
>> 7 files changed, 653 insertions(+), 38 deletions(-)
>
> Hey,
>
> So, I've been following the discussion silently in the background and I
> see that it got sidetracked into seccomp + ebpf. While I can see that
> there is value in adding epbf support to seccomp I'd really like to see
> this decoupled from this patchset. Afaict, this patchset would just work
> fine without the ebpf portion (but I might be just have missed the
> point). So if possible I would like to see a second version of this with
> the comments accounted for and - if possible - have this up for merging
> independent of the ebpf patchset that's floating around.
>
The issue is that it might be (and, then again, might not be) nicer to
to *synchronously* call out to the monitor in the filter. eBPF can do
that very cleanly, whereas classic BPF can't.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-03-15 16:56 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 30+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-02-04 10:49 [RFC 0/3] seccomp trap to userspace Tycho Andersen
2018-02-04 10:49 ` [RFC 1/3] seccomp: add a return code to " Tycho Andersen
2018-02-04 17:36 ` Andy Lutomirski
2018-02-04 20:01 ` Tycho Andersen
2018-02-04 20:33 ` Andy Lutomirski
2018-02-05 8:47 ` Tycho Andersen
2018-02-13 21:09 ` Kees Cook
2018-02-14 15:29 ` Tycho Andersen
2018-02-14 17:19 ` Andy Lutomirski
2018-02-14 17:23 ` Tycho Andersen
2018-02-15 14:48 ` Christian Brauner
2018-02-27 0:49 ` Kees Cook
2018-02-27 3:27 ` Andy Lutomirski
2018-02-04 10:49 ` [RFC 2/3] seccomp: hoist out filter resolving logic Tycho Andersen
2018-02-13 21:29 ` Kees Cook
2018-02-14 15:33 ` Tycho Andersen
2018-02-04 10:49 ` [RFC 3/3] seccomp: add a way to get a listener fd from ptrace Tycho Andersen
2018-02-13 21:32 ` Kees Cook
2018-02-14 15:33 ` Tycho Andersen
2018-03-15 16:09 ` [RFC 0/3] seccomp trap to userspace Christian Brauner
2018-03-15 16:56 ` Andy Lutomirski [this message]
2018-03-15 17:05 ` Serge E. Hallyn
2018-03-15 17:11 ` Andy Lutomirski
2018-03-15 17:25 ` Christian Brauner
2018-03-15 17:30 ` Andy Lutomirski
2018-03-15 17:35 ` Tycho Andersen
2018-03-16 0:46 ` Andy Lutomirski
2018-03-16 14:47 ` Christian Brauner
2018-03-16 16:01 ` Andy Lutomirski
2018-03-16 16:40 ` Christian Brauner
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to='CALCETrVnvbZLx5v=DMu2N1JtR+ys507X5CYBi-qQnus3VMQdwg@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=luto@kernel.org \
--cc=christian.brauner@canonical.com \
--cc=christian.brauner@ubuntu.com \
--cc=containers@lists.linux-foundation.org \
--cc=ebiederm@xmission.com \
--cc=keescook@chromium.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=oleg@redhat.com \
--cc=serge@hallyn.com \
--cc=suda.akihiro@lab.ntt.co.jp \
--cc=tycho@tycho.ws \
--cc=tyhicks@canonical.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).