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

Groups > linux.kernel > #1707944

Re: [PATCH v3 0/4] seccomp: Add SECCOMP_FILTER_FLAG_KILL_PROCESS

Show all headers | View raw

On Wed, Aug 9, 2017 at 1:33 PM, Tyler Hicks <tyhicks@canonical.com> wrote:
> Hey Tycho!
>
> On 08/09/2017 03:22 PM, Tycho Andersen wrote:
>> On Wed, Aug 09, 2017 at 12:01:53PM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
>>> This series is the result of Fabricio and I going around a few times
>>> on possible solutions for finding a way to enhance RET_KILL to kill
>>> the process group. There's a lot of ways this could be done, but I
>>> wanted something that felt cleanest. As it happens, Tyler's recent
>>> patch series for logging improvement also needs to know a litte bit
>>> more during filter runs, and the solution for both is to pass back
>>> the matched filter. This lets us examine it here for RET_KILL and
>>> in the future for logging changes.
>>>
>>> The filter passing is patch 1, the new flag for RET_KILL is patch 2.
>>> Some test refactoring is in patch 3 for the RET_DATA ordering, and
>>> patch 4 is the test for the new RET_KILL flag.
>>>
>>> One thing missing is that CRIU will likely need to be updated, since
>>> saving/restoring seccomp filter _rules_ will not include the filter
>>> _flags_ for a process. This can be addressed separately.
>>
>> Thanks for the heads up, I suppose PTRACE_SECCOMP_GET_FLAGS similar to
>> how PTRACE_SECCOMP_GET_FILTER works will be fine for this. One
>> question is: would we then also need to keep track of the TSYNC flag?
>> I don't think CRIU needs this to be correct, and we can grab the
>> KILL_PROCESS flag from filter->kill_process, so perhaps it's moot.

It does not need to track TSYNC (since the results of that flag are
represented in the filter tree itself).

> Note that the logging changes that I'm working on also introduce a new
> filter flag (as Kees mentioned above). My filter flag is a lot like the
> KILL_PROCESS filter flag in that it is stored as a member of the
> seccomp_filter struct.
>
> I would think that you'd want to be able to do something like
> PTRACE_SECCOMP_GET_FILTER to (hopefully) future proof CRIU against all
> newly added filter flags.

I didn't see an obvious way to extend the existing
PTRACE_SECCOMP_GET_FILTER to also return flags, so I think either a
new function for just flags or a new versioned function for rules and
flags will be needed.

>> Anyway, happy to do this and the userspace part when this lands.

Okay, great! Thanks!

-Kees

-- 
Kees Cook
Pixel Security

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

Thread

[PATCH v3 0/4] seccomp: Add SECCOMP_FILTER_FLAG_KILL_PROCESS Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org> - 2017-08-09 21:10 +0200
  [PATCH v3 4/4] selftests/seccomp: Test thread vs process killing Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org> - 2017-08-09 21:10 +0200
  [PATCH v3 1/4] seccomp: Provide matching filter for introspection Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org> - 2017-08-09 21:10 +0200
  Re: [PATCH v3 0/4] seccomp: Add SECCOMP_FILTER_FLAG_KILL_PROCESS Tycho Andersen <tycho@docker.com> - 2017-08-09 22:30 +0200
    Re: [PATCH v3 0/4] seccomp: Add SECCOMP_FILTER_FLAG_KILL_PROCESS Tyler Hicks <tyhicks@canonical.com> - 2017-08-09 22:40 +0200
      Re: [PATCH v3 0/4] seccomp: Add SECCOMP_FILTER_FLAG_KILL_PROCESS Tycho Andersen <tycho@docker.com> - 2017-08-09 22:50 +0200
      Re: [PATCH v3 0/4] seccomp: Add SECCOMP_FILTER_FLAG_KILL_PROCESS Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org> - 2017-08-09 23:00 +0200

csiph-web