Re: [RFC PATCH 0/3] move the secure_computing call

[Roland McGrath]

On Thu, May 24, 2012 at 9:13 AM, H. Peter Anvin <hpa@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> I think this really screws with using seccomp for self-interception.  I
> wouldn't inherently be opposed to the following flow:
>
>        seccomp -> ptrace -> seccomp
>
> ... i.e. if ptrace is enabled and we enable something, run it through
> seccomp again, but there are bunch of use cases (mostly involving
> SIGSYS) where doing ptrace before seccomp is just bizarre.

Are you sure?  This is ptrace syscall tracing going first.
If seccomp generates a SIGSYS, then ptrace will still get its opportunity
to intercept the signal and change the register state however it likes.


Thanks,
Roland
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/