Re: [PATCH v6 1/9] kernel: Support TIF_SYSCALL_INTERCEPT flag
From: Kees Cook
Date: Wed Sep 23 2020 - 16:49:59 EST
On Wed, Sep 23, 2020 at 04:18:26PM -0400, Gabriel Krisman Bertazi wrote:
> Kees Cook <keescook@xxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> > On Fri, Sep 04, 2020 at 04:31:39PM -0400, Gabriel Krisman Bertazi wrote:
> >> Convert TIF_SECCOMP into a generic TI flag for any syscall interception
> >> work being done by the kernel. The actual type of work is exposed by a
> >> new flag field outside of thread_info. This ensures that the
> >> syscall_intercept field is only accessed if struct seccomp has to be
> >> accessed already, such that it doesn't incur in a much higher cost to
> >> the seccomp path.
> >> In order to avoid modifying every architecture at once, this patch has a
> >> transition mechanism, such that architectures that define TIF_SECCOMP
> >> continue to work by ignoring the syscall_intercept flag, as long as they
> >> don't support other syscall interception mechanisms like the future
> >> syscall user dispatch. When migrating TIF_SECCOMP to
> >> TIF_SYSCALL_INTERCEPT, they should adopt the semantics of checking the
> >> syscall_intercept flag, like it is done in the common entry syscall
> >> code, or even better, migrate to the common syscall entry code.
> > Can we "eat" all the other flags like ptrace, audit, etc, too? Doing
> > this only for seccomp seems strange.
> Hi Kees, Thanks again for the review.
> Yes, we can, and I'm happy to follow up with that as part of my TIF
> clean up work, but can we not block the current patchset to be merged
> waiting for that, as this already grew a lot from the original feature
In that case, I'd say just add the new TIF flag. The consolidation can