[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Qemu-devel] [Bug 1726394] [NEW] Passes through prctl(PR_SET_SECCOMP, SE
From: |
Julian Andres Klode |
Subject: |
[Qemu-devel] [Bug 1726394] [NEW] Passes through prctl(PR_SET_SECCOMP, SECCOMP_MODE_FILTER, address) |
Date: |
Mon, 23 Oct 2017 13:16:29 -0000 |
Public bug reported:
qemu-user passes through prctl(PR_SET_SECCOMP, SECCOMP_MODE_FILTER,
address) unmodified, but the third argument is an address to a BPF
filter, causing an EFAULT. Now, the filter is architecture-specifc, so
you can't just rewrite the addresses, so the safest bet is to just
return an error here.
I guess you should just return EINVAL, but not sure. I'd really like
something that can be identified, so seccomp errors can be ignored when
it's not supported.
** Affects: qemu
Importance: Undecided
Status: New
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of qemu-
devel-ml, which is subscribed to QEMU.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1726394
Title:
Passes through prctl(PR_SET_SECCOMP, SECCOMP_MODE_FILTER, address)
Status in QEMU:
New
Bug description:
qemu-user passes through prctl(PR_SET_SECCOMP, SECCOMP_MODE_FILTER,
address) unmodified, but the third argument is an address to a BPF
filter, causing an EFAULT. Now, the filter is architecture-specifc, so
you can't just rewrite the addresses, so the safest bet is to just
return an error here.
I guess you should just return EINVAL, but not sure. I'd really like
something that can be identified, so seccomp errors can be ignored
when it's not supported.
To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/qemu/+bug/1726394/+subscriptions
- [Qemu-devel] [Bug 1726394] [NEW] Passes through prctl(PR_SET_SECCOMP, SECCOMP_MODE_FILTER, address),
Julian Andres Klode <=