Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.kernel > #1321451

Re: [RFC][PATCH] seccomp: add SECCOMP_RET_ACK for non-fatal SIGSYS

From Jeffrey Vander Stoep <jeffv@google.com>
Newsgroups linux.kernel
Subject Re: [RFC][PATCH] seccomp: add SECCOMP_RET_ACK for non-fatal SIGSYS
Date 2016-01-29 04:10 +0100
Message-ID <qW7BE-4O7-11@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink)
References <qW5Jv-3s7-9@gated-at.bofh.it> <qW78B-4lQ-1@gated-at.bofh.it>
Organization linux.* mail to news gateway

Show all headers | View raw

Thanks! This is just what I need.

What are the drawbacks to returning the sigsys before executing the
system call? Otherwise this loses the benefit of properly reporting
registers for argument inspection.

How about SECCOMP_RET_PERMISSIVE? Describes the application rather
than the implementation. Otherwise preference is for
SECCOMP_RET_ALLOW_SIGSYS.

Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

[RFC][PATCH] seccomp: add SECCOMP_RET_ACK for non-fatal SIGSYS Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org> - 2016-01-29 02:10 +0100
  Re: [RFC][PATCH] seccomp: add SECCOMP_RET_ACK for non-fatal SIGSYS Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net> - 2016-01-29 03:40 +0100
    Re: [RFC][PATCH] seccomp: add SECCOMP_RET_ACK for non-fatal SIGSYS Jeffrey Vander Stoep <jeffv@google.com> - 2016-01-29 04:10 +0100
    Re: [RFC][PATCH] seccomp: add SECCOMP_RET_ACK for non-fatal SIGSYS Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net> - 2016-01-31 21:20 +0100

csiph-web