On 06/20/2016 08:37 PM, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 20, 2016 at 9:29 AM, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
>> Setting TS_COMPAT in ptrace is wrong: if we happen to do it during
>> syscall entry, then we'll confuse seccomp and audit. (The former
>> isn't a security problem: seccomp is currently enti
On Mon, Jun 20, 2016 at 9:29 AM, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> Setting TS_COMPAT in ptrace is wrong: if we happen to do it during
> syscall entry, then we'll confuse seccomp and audit. (The former
> isn't a security problem: seccomp is currently entirely insecure if a
> malicious ptracer is attached.)
Setting TS_COMPAT in ptrace is wrong: if we happen to do it during
syscall entry, then we'll confuse seccomp and audit. (The former
isn't a security problem: seccomp is currently entirely insecure if a
malicious ptracer is attached.) As a minimal fix, this patch adds a
new flag TS_I386_REGS_POKED
3 matches
Mail list logo