Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Date:   Fri, 26 Jul 2019 11:01:03 -0700
From:   Sean Christopherson <sean.j.christopherson@intel.com>
To:     Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc:     Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>,
        Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>,
        Vincenzo Frascino <vincenzo.frascino@arm.com>,
        X86 ML <x86@kernel.org>, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Paul Bolle <pebolle@tiscali.nl>
Subject: Re: [5.2 REGRESSION] Generic vDSO breaks seccomp-enabled userspace
 on i386
Message-ID: <20190726180103.GE3188@linux.intel.com>
References: <201907221012.41504DCD@keescook>
 <alpine.DEB.2.21.1907222027090.1659@nanos.tec.linutronix.de>
 <201907221135.2C2D262D8@keescook>
 <CALCETrVnV8o_jqRDZua1V0s_fMYweP2J2GbwWA-cLxqb_PShog@mail.gmail.com>
 <201907221620.F31B9A082@keescook>
 <CALCETrWqu-S3rrg8kf6aqqkXg9Z+TFQHbUgpZEiUU+m8KRARqg@mail.gmail.com>
 <201907231437.DB20BEBD3@keescook>
 <alpine.DEB.2.21.1907240038001.27812@nanos.tec.linutronix.de>
 <201907231636.AD3ED717D@keescook>
 <alpine.DEB.2.21.1907240155080.2034@nanos.tec.linutronix.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.21.1907240155080.2034@nanos.tec.linutronix.de>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

+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.