Re: [PATCH v12 06/13] seccomp: add system call filtering using BPF

[Indan Zupancic]

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


--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/