lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2019]   [Jul]   [27]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
Date
SubjectRe: [5.2 REGRESSION] Generic vDSO breaks seccomp-enabled userspace on i386
On Fri, Jul 26, 2019 at 11:01 AM Sean Christopherson
<sean.j.christopherson@intel.com> wrote:
>
> +cc Paul
>
> On Wed, Jul 24, 2019 at 01:56:34AM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > On Tue, 23 Jul 2019, Kees Cook wrote:
> >
> > > On Wed, Jul 24, 2019 at 12:59:03AM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > > > And as we have sys_clock_gettime64() exposed for 32bit anyway you need to
> > > > deal with that in seccomp independently of the VDSO. It does not make sense
> > > > to treat sys_clock_gettime() differently than sys_clock_gettime64(). They
> > > > both expose the same information, but the latter is y2038 safe.
> > >
> > > Okay, so combining Andy's ideas on aliasing and "more seccomp flags",
> > > we could declare that clock_gettime64() is not filterable on 32-bit at
> > > all without the magic SECCOMP_IGNORE_ALIASES flag or something. Then we
> > > would alias clock_gettime64 to clock_gettime _before_ the first evaluation
> > > (unless SECCOMP_IGNORE_ALIASES is set)?
> > >
> > > (When was clock_gettime64() introduced? Is it too long ago to do this
> > > "you can't filter it without a special flag" change?)
> >
> > clock_gettime64() and the other sys_*time64() syscalls which address the
> > y2038 issue were added in 5.1
>
> Paul Bolle pointed out that this regression showed up in v5.3-rc1, not
> v5.2. In Paul's case, systemd-journal is failing.

I think it's getting quite late to start inventing new seccomp
features to fix this. I think the right solution for 5.3 is to change
the 32-bit vdso fallback to use the old clock_gettime, i.e.
clock_gettime32. This is obviously not an acceptable long-term
solution.

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2019-07-27 19:51    [W:0.053 / U:5.564 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site