On 06/20/2014 06:48 PM, Kees Cook wrote:
...
Are there any plans to put and extend test cases from [1] via user space
side into the kernel self-test directory, i.e. into something like
tools/testing/selftests/seccomp/ so that in future new tests can be added
or run from there? Might be worth to c
On Fri, Jun 20, 2014 at 3:13 AM, Daniel Borkmann wrote:
> Hi Kees,
>
>
> On 06/19/2014 01:28 AM, Kees Cook wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Jun 18, 2014 at 4:19 PM, Alexei Starovoitov
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Wed, Jun 18, 2014 at 3:55 PM, Kees Cook wrote:
On Wed, Jun 18, 2014 at 3:48 PM, Alexei Starov
Hi Kees,
On 06/19/2014 01:28 AM, Kees Cook wrote:
On Wed, Jun 18, 2014 at 4:19 PM, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
On Wed, Jun 18, 2014 at 3:55 PM, Kees Cook wrote:
On Wed, Jun 18, 2014 at 3:48 PM, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
On Wed, Jun 18, 2014 at 3:34 PM, Kees Cook wrote:
...
I wonder how di
From: Kees Cook
Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2014 15:34:57 -0700
> The original checks (via sk_chk_filter) for instruction count uses ">",
> not ">=", so changing this in sk_convert_filter has the potential to break
> existing seccomp filters that used exactly BPF_MAXINSNS many instructions.
>
> Fixes: bd4
On Wed, Jun 18, 2014 at 4:19 PM, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 18, 2014 at 3:55 PM, Kees Cook wrote:
>> On Wed, Jun 18, 2014 at 3:48 PM, Alexei Starovoitov
>> wrote:
>>> On Wed, Jun 18, 2014 at 3:34 PM, Kees Cook wrote:
The original checks (via sk_chk_filter) for instruction cou
On Wed, Jun 18, 2014 at 3:55 PM, Kees Cook wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 18, 2014 at 3:48 PM, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
>> On Wed, Jun 18, 2014 at 3:34 PM, Kees Cook wrote:
>>> The original checks (via sk_chk_filter) for instruction count uses ">",
>>> not ">=", so changing this in sk_convert_filter has
On Wed, Jun 18, 2014 at 3:48 PM, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 18, 2014 at 3:34 PM, Kees Cook wrote:
>> The original checks (via sk_chk_filter) for instruction count uses ">",
>> not ">=", so changing this in sk_convert_filter has the potential to break
>> existing seccomp filters that
On Wed, Jun 18, 2014 at 3:34 PM, Kees Cook wrote:
> The original checks (via sk_chk_filter) for instruction count uses ">",
> not ">=", so changing this in sk_convert_filter has the potential to break
> existing seccomp filters that used exactly BPF_MAXINSNS many instructions.
>
> Fixes: bd4cf0ed3
On 06/19/2014 12:34 AM, Kees Cook wrote:
The original checks (via sk_chk_filter) for instruction count uses ">",
not ">=", so changing this in sk_convert_filter has the potential to break
existing seccomp filters that used exactly BPF_MAXINSNS many instructions.
Fixes: bd4cf0ed331a ("net: filter
The original checks (via sk_chk_filter) for instruction count uses ">",
not ">=", so changing this in sk_convert_filter has the potential to break
existing seccomp filters that used exactly BPF_MAXINSNS many instructions.
Fixes: bd4cf0ed331a ("net: filter: rework/optimize internal BPF interpreter'
10 matches
Mail list logo