From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757265Ab2CBINT (ORCPT ); Fri, 2 Mar 2012 03:13:19 -0500 Received: from smarthost1.greenhost.nl ([195.190.28.78]:58912 "EHLO smarthost1.greenhost.nl" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752645Ab2CBINP (ORCPT ); Fri, 2 Mar 2012 03:13:15 -0500 Message-ID: <5e22306601c1718407f477e64d2e75b9.squirrel@webmail.greenhost.nl> In-Reply-To: <4F506EE2.1050705@zytor.com> References: <1330559620-23543-1-git-send-email-wad@chromium.org> <1330559620-23543-6-git-send-email-wad@chromium.org> <4F50603B.7040505@zytor.com> <4F506EE2.1050705@zytor.com> Date: Fri, 2 Mar 2012 09:12:58 +0100 Subject: Re: [PATCH v12 06/13] seccomp: add system call filtering using BPF From: "Indan Zupancic" To: "H. Peter Anvin" Cc: "Will Drewry" , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org, x86@kernel.org, arnd@arndb.de, davem@davemloft.net, mingo@redhat.com, oleg@redhat.com, peterz@infradead.org, rdunlap@xenotime.net, mcgrathr@chromium.org, tglx@linutronix.de, luto@mit.edu, eparis@redhat.com, serge.hallyn@canonical.com, djm@mindrot.org, scarybeasts@gmail.com, pmoore@redhat.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org, corbet@lwn.net, eric.dumazet@gmail.com, markus@chromium.org, coreyb@linux.vnet.ibm.com, keescook@chromium.org User-Agent: SquirrelMail/1.4.22 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain;charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Importance: Normal X-Spam-Score: 0.1 X-Scan-Signature: 2ecd0b53b7de9511489f92806276a3d7 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, March 2, 2012 07:55, H. Peter Anvin wrote: > On 03/01/2012 10:43 PM, Indan Zupancic wrote: > Ok, fail on my part - I misread the above to refer to @arch, not > @instruction_pointer. Ah, that explains a lot. >>> -- Pin is a great example. >> Is that http://www.pintool.org/? >> >> Can you explain how knowing the IP is useful for Pin? >> >> All I am asking for is just one use case for providing the IP. Is that >> asking for too much? > > However, it still applies. For something like Pin, Pin may want to trap > on all or a subset from the instrumented program, while the > instrumentation code -- which lives in the same address space -- needs > to execute those same instructions. > > Yes, it's useless for *security* (unless perhaps if you keep very strict > tabs on the flow of control by using debug registers, dynamic > translation or whatnot), but it can be highly useful for > *instrumentation*, where you want to analyze the behavior of a > non-malicious program. That is a good use case indeed, I'm convinced. Thanks, Indan