This bug was fixed in the package libseccomp - 2.3.1-2.1ubuntu4.1
---
libseccomp (2.3.1-2.1ubuntu4.1) bionic; urgency=medium
* d/p/lp-1755250-add-the-statx-syscall.patch: add statx support (LP: #1755250)
* d/p/lp-1815415-*: Add syscalls up to kernel 4.15 (LP: #1815415)
--
Testing as-is
$ ${ADTTMP}/exe ./debian/tests/data/newcodes.filter /bin/date; echo $?
DEBUG: seccomp_load_filters ./debian/tests/data/newcodes.filter
failed to find preadv2
seccomp_load_filters failed with -1
1
Update to version in proposed:
$ sudo apt install libseccomp2/bionic-proposed
Reading
Added improved test ordering to the description
** Description changed:
[Impact]
* The libseccomp library provides an easy to use, platform independent,
interface to the Linux Kernel's syscall filtering mechanism. But it can
only "control" those syscalls it knows about.
Hello Christian, or anyone else affected,
Accepted libseccomp into bionic-proposed. The package will build now and
be available at
https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/libseccomp/2.3.1-2.1ubuntu4.1 in a
few hours, and then in the -proposed repository.
Please help us by testing this new package.
Thanks Christian, very thorough.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to libseccomp in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1815415
Title:
please update libseccomp for newer kernel syscalls
Status in libseccomp
FYI (to find it easier) logs of the new build:
- autopkgtest with new version
https://objectstorage.prodstack4-5.canonical.com/v1/AUTH_77e2ada1e7a84929a74ba3b87153c0ac/autopkgtest-bionic-ci-train-ppa-service-3640/bionic/amd64/libs/libseccomp/20190211_095659_0b835@/log.gz
- build time tests
All pre-checks and tests complete, and uploaded to the SRU review queue
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to libseccomp in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1815415
Title:
please update libseccomp for
Thanks for the reviews - I'll have to come up with some tests on my own
then ...
In general there already are build time tests and autopkgtests in the package.
So coverage of "old calls" for regressions is already good.
Fortunately the autopkgtests seem to be extendable for an explicit
On Mon, Feb 11, 2019 at 07:38:28AM -, Christian Ehrhardt wrote:
> @Seth / @Tyler - Hi, you asked for the change, but I'd want to ask for
> something as well :-) Do you have any testcases from your security work
> that we could reuse here to check the SRU for SRU verification?
It doesn't
Sorry about the question about s390 syscalls in unrelated syscall
tables; that patch accurately reflected upstream's code.
Looks good to me, thanks.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to libseccomp in Ubuntu.
I combined the requested changes in the PPA [1] and version ~ppa2 is
building now. Later autopkgtests will be kicked on bileto [2] to pre-
check those as well.
I updated the MP for re-review accordingly.
[1]: https://launchpad.net/~ci-train-ppa-service/+archive/ubuntu/3640
[2]:
** Merge proposal linked:
https://code.launchpad.net/~paelzer/ubuntu/+source/libseccomp/+git/libseccomp/+merge/362906
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to libseccomp in Ubuntu.
Combining all those also allows us to take the changes (since they only
add definitions the only context they had were "each other) without any
backport noise.
** Description changed:
[Impact]
* The libseccomp library provides an easy to use, platform independent,
interface to the
** Description changed:
[Impact]
* The libseccomp library provides an easy to use, platform independent,
interface to the Linux Kernel's syscall filtering mechanism. But it can
only "control" those syscalls it knows about. Therefore staying up to
date with newer kernels is
@Seth / @Tyler - Hi, you asked for the change, but I'd want to ask for
something as well :-) Do you have any testcases from your security work
that we could reuse here to check the SRU for SRU verification?
** Description changed:
+ [Impact]
+
+ * The libseccomp library provides an easy to
15 matches
Mail list logo
