|
Message-ID: <CABqD9hZcBiG579hUuxkvmUE122vVee_u9Ta7Hwrp4h-Sb8Lbcg@mail.gmail.com> Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2012 10:22:09 -0600 From: Will Drewry <wad@...omium.org> To: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org> Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arch@...r.kernel.org, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org, x86@...nel.org, arnd@...db.de, davem@...emloft.net, hpa@...or.com, mingo@...hat.com, oleg@...hat.com, peterz@...radead.org, rdunlap@...otime.net, mcgrathr@...omium.org, tglx@...utronix.de, luto@....edu, eparis@...hat.com, serge.hallyn@...onical.com, djm@...drot.org, scarybeasts@...il.com, indan@....nu, pmoore@...hat.com, akpm@...ux-foundation.org, corbet@....net, eric.dumazet@...il.com, markus@...omium.org, coreyb@...ux.vnet.ibm.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v11 07/12] seccomp: add SECCOMP_RET_ERRNO On Sat, Feb 25, 2012 at 2:20 PM, Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org> wrote: > On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 7:21 PM, Will Drewry <wad@...omium.org> wrote: >> This change adds the SECCOMP_RET_ERRNO as a valid return value from a >> seccomp filter. Additionally, it makes the first use of the lower >> 16-bits for storing a filter-supplied errno. 16-bits is more than >> enough for the errno-base.h calls. >> >> Returning errors instead of immediately terminating processes that >> violate seccomp policy allow for broader use of this functionality >> for kernel attack surface reduction. For example, a linux container >> could maintain a whitelist of pre-existing system calls but drop >> all new ones with errnos. This would keep a logically static attack >> surface while providing errnos that may allow for graceful failure >> without the downside of do_exit() on a bad call. >> >> v11: - check for NULL filter (keescook@...omium.org) >> v10: - change loaders to fn >> v9: - n/a >> v8: - update Kconfig to note new need for syscall_set_return_value. >> - reordered such that TRAP behavior follows on later. >> - made the for loop a little less indent-y >> v7: - introduced >> >> Signed-off-by: Will Drewry <wad@...omium.org> > > Reviewed-by: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org> Thanks! >> + /* Ensure unexpected behavior doesn't result in failing open. */ >> + if (unlikely(current->seccomp.filter == NULL)) >> + ret = SECCOMP_RET_KILL; > > Any reason to not just immediately return in this case? Not that I can think of. I can just have it bail here.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.