Patches 1 and 2 I applied for 3.10, but I'd really like to have someone who
knows PPC ack 3 and 4. Especially if there is a hope that it goes through my
tree...
Link to original messages for your ease of review...
http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernelm=135768892320439w=2
[dropping microblaze and roland]
lOn Fri, 2011-05-13 at 14:10 +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
* James Morris jmor...@namei.org wrote:
It is a simple and sensible security feature, agreed? It allows most code to
run well and link to countless libraries - but no access to other files is
allowed.
[dropping microblaze and roland]
On Fri, 2011-05-13 at 15:18 +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
* Peter Zijlstra pet...@infradead.org wrote:
On Fri, 2011-05-13 at 14:54 +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
I think the sanest semantics is to run all active callbacks as well.
For example if this is used
On Fri, 2011-05-13 at 17:23 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
On Fri, 2011-05-13 at 11:10 -0400, Eric Paris wrote:
Then again, I certainly don't see a
reason that this syscall hardening patch should be held up while a whole
new concept in computer security is contemplated...
Which makes me
].
Signed-off-by: Eric Paris epa...@redhat.com
---
arch/ia64/include/asm/ptrace.h| 10 +-
arch/ia64/kernel/ptrace.c |9 +
arch/microblaze/include/asm/ptrace.h |2 ++
arch/microblaze/kernel/ptrace.c |3 +--
arch/mips/include
On 06/02/2011 06:32 PM, Richard Weinberger wrote:
Am Donnerstag 02 Juni 2011, 23:04:58 schrieb Eric Paris:
b/arch/um/sys-i386/shared/sysdep/ptrace.h index d50e62e..ef5c310 100644
--- a/arch/um/sys-i386/shared/sysdep/ptrace.h
+++ b/arch/um/sys-i386/shared/sysdep/ptrace.h
@@ -162,6 +162,7
On 06/02/2011 07:00 PM, Tony Luck wrote:
But there seems to be another problem.
Why is pt_regs of type void *?
gcc complains:
In file included from include/linux/fsnotify.h:15:0,
from include/linux/security.h:26,
from init/main.c:32:
include/linux/audit.h:
, kretprobe_example.c, won't notice and it makes
the value signed consistently for the audit functions across all archs.
Signed-off-by: Eric Paris epa...@redhat.com
Acked-by: Acked-by: H. Peter Anvin h...@zytor.com [for x86 portion]
---
arch/ia64/include/asm/ptrace.h| 13
On Tue, 2011-06-07 at 19:19 +0200, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
On 06/03, Eric Paris wrote:
The audit system previously expected arches calling to audit_syscall_exit to
supply as arguments if the syscall was a success and what the return code
was.
Audit also provides a helper AUDITSC_RESULT
On Wed, 2011-06-08 at 18:36 +0200, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
On 06/07, Eric Paris wrote:
On Tue, 2011-06-07 at 19:19 +0200, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
With or without this patch, can't we call audit_syscall_exit() twice
if there is something else in _TIF_WORK_SYSCALL_EXIT mask apart from
(), much like ia64 makes it negative
before calling the audit code when appropriate.
Signed-off-by: Eric Paris epa...@redhat.com
Acked-by: H. Peter Anvin h...@zytor.com [for x86 portion]
Acked-by: Tony Luck tony.l...@intel.com [for ia64]
Acked-by: Richard Weinberger rich...@nod.at [for uml]
Acked
For all arches which support audit implement syscall_get_arch()
They are all pretty easy and straight forward, stolen from how the call
to audit_syscall_entry() determines the arch.
Signed-off-by: Eric Paris epa...@redhat.com
Cc: linux-i...@vger.kernel.org
Cc: microblaze-ucli...@itee.uq.edu.au
Cc
We have a function where the arch can be queried, syscall_get_arch().
So rather than have every single piece of arch specific code use and/or
duplicate syscall_get_arch(), just have the audit code use the
syscall_get_arch() code.
Signed-off-by: Eric Paris epa...@redhat.com
Cc: linux-al
On Wed, 2014-03-19 at 15:19 -0700, Matt Turner wrote:
On Wed, Mar 19, 2014 at 3:04 PM, Eric Paris epa...@redhat.com wrote:
For all arches which support audit implement syscall_get_arch()
support audit -- is that AUDIT_ARCH? If so, alpha gained support
recently, so I think this patch needs
14 matches
Mail list logo
