From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.org/gmane.linux.lib.musl.general/8203
Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail
From: Szabolcs Nagy <nsz@port70.net>
Newsgroups: gmane.linux.lib.musl.general
Subject: Re: Using direct socket syscalls on x86_32 where available?
Date: Sat, 25 Jul 2015 20:35:27 +0200
Message-ID: <20150725183527.GB13650@port70.net>
References: <CALCETrX_b68Ex+i4Aq=Nep-ADvSD=VDmj-K8XEaUB+4JNba2Tw@mail.gmail.com>
Reply-To: musl@lists.openwall.com
NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1437849342 27379 80.91.229.3 (25 Jul 2015 18:35:42 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 25 Jul 2015 18:35:42 +0000 (UTC)
To: musl@lists.openwall.com
Original-X-From: musl-return-8216-gllmg-musl=m.gmane.org@lists.openwall.com Sat Jul 25 20:35:42 2015
Return-path: <musl-return-8216-gllmg-musl=m.gmane.org@lists.openwall.com>
Envelope-to: gllmg-musl@m.gmane.org
Original-Received: from mother.openwall.net ([195.42.179.200])
	by plane.gmane.org with smtp (Exim 4.69)
	(envelope-from <musl-return-8216-gllmg-musl=m.gmane.org@lists.openwall.com>)
	id 1ZJ4IP-0006aJ-7i
	for gllmg-musl@m.gmane.org; Sat, 25 Jul 2015 20:35:41 +0200
Original-Received: (qmail 8143 invoked by uid 550); 25 Jul 2015 18:35:39 -0000
Mailing-List: contact musl-help@lists.openwall.com; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Post: <mailto:musl@lists.openwall.com>
List-Help: <mailto:musl-help@lists.openwall.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:musl-unsubscribe@lists.openwall.com>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:musl-subscribe@lists.openwall.com>
Original-Received: (qmail 8125 invoked from network); 25 Jul 2015 18:35:39 -0000
Mail-Followup-To: musl@lists.openwall.com
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CALCETrX_b68Ex+i4Aq=Nep-ADvSD=VDmj-K8XEaUB+4JNba2Tw@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12)
Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.linux.lib.musl.general:8203
Archived-At: <http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.linux.lib.musl.general/8203>

* Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net> [2015-07-25 10:54:28 -0700]:
> If userspace adapts by preferring the direct syscalls when available,
> it'll make it easier for seccomp to filter new userspace programs
> (and, ideally, eventually disallow socketcall for sandbox-aware code).

btw is there a nice cmdline tool for seccomp now?

or is the api still manual construction of bpf byte code in c?