Re: [Ksummit-discuss] [TECH TOPIC] seccomp feature development

Linus Torvalds <[email protected]> Wed, 20 May 2020 12:08:52 -0700

Newsgroups	org.linuxfoundation.lists.ksummit-discuss,dev.linux.lists.ksummit
Message-ID	<CAHk-=wgwS8RJNuaLT1zV_bWGiEb3DndfQ3N85WK9aKP5Kurk_A@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, May 20, 2020 at 12:04 PM Kees Cook <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Things seccomp is NOT expected to introspect due to complexity would be
> stuff like the bpf() syscall.

Right.

I don't dispute at all that those kinds of pointer-to-pointer things
exist all over.

But:

> Perhaps the question is "how deeply does seccomp need to inspect?"
> and maybe it does not get to see anything beyond just the "top level"
> struct (i.e. struct clone_args) and all pointers within THAT become
> opaque? That certainly simplifies the design.

Exactly. I think that's the most common situation by far. Does anybody
really really need to care at a deep level, and why?

              Linus
_______________________________________________
Ksummit-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ksummit-discuss