Re: [-mm patch] seccomp: don't say it was more or less mandatory

[Ingo Molnar]

* Andrea Arcangeli <andrea@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> > which quite likely wont be provable in the foreseeable future).
> 
> Please mention a _single_ bug that could allow you to escape the
> seccomp jail in linux since 2.4.0 on x86 and x86-64 (and with escape I
> don't mean sniffing data with mmx not being backwards compatible, or
> f00f DoS, I mean executing code into the host as user nobody). I'm not
> aware of a _single_ seccomp bug that could allow you to escape the
> seccomp jail since 2.4.0 and probably much earlier.

ugh? Where do i claim any such thing?

while we are at it, please mention a single ptrace bug in the same
timeframe that could allow a bytecode 'client' to escape a ptrace
TRACE_SYSCALL jail at will.

	Ingo
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/