From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on inbox.vuxu.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.3 required=5.0 tests=MAILING_LIST_MULTI, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 Received: (qmail 12112 invoked from network); 15 Feb 2022 17:44:35 -0000 Received: from mother.openwall.net (195.42.179.200) by inbox.vuxu.org with ESMTPUTF8; 15 Feb 2022 17:44:35 -0000 Received: (qmail 17610 invoked by uid 550); 15 Feb 2022 17:44:33 -0000 Mailing-List: contact musl-help@lists.openwall.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-ID: Reply-To: musl@lists.openwall.com Received: (qmail 17578 invoked from network); 15 Feb 2022 17:44:33 -0000 Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2022 12:44:20 -0500 From: Rich Felker To: Satadru Pramanik Cc: musl@lists.openwall.com Message-ID: <20220215174420.GL7074@brightrain.aerifal.cx> References: <20220206234405.GW7074@brightrain.aerifal.cx> <20220207024056.GY7074@brightrain.aerifal.cx> <20220207210223.GZ7074@brightrain.aerifal.cx> <20220214182952.GI7074@brightrain.aerifal.cx> <20220214220043.GK7074@brightrain.aerifal.cx> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Subject: Re: [musl] Re: musl getaddr info breakage on older kernels On Tue, Feb 15, 2022 at 11:59:52AM -0500, Satadru Pramanik wrote: > On Mon, Feb 14, 2022 at 5:00 PM Rich Felker wrote: > > > Note: you dropped the list from CC in your last reply; I've re-added > > it and bounced your message to the list. > > > > Mea culpa! > > > > > > > When I ran that, I got this: > > > .../musl_getaddrinfo_test google.com > > > AF_INET: 142.250.80.46 > > > AF_INET6: 2607:f8b0:4006:80b::200e > > > > Are you saying it works (resolves correctly) with the above command > > line? If so that's indicative of buggy Docker seccomp. > > > I am saying it resolves correctly with the above command line. > > Suggestions on what command line I should be using? OK, then in that case it's surely Docker's seccomp filters that are the problem. I think --security-opt seccomp=unconfined is the part you need to work around it. Alternatively, I'm pretty sure this is fixed in latest Docker (note: this includes latest for its runtime components like runc, libseccomp, etc.) so upgrading Docker might be an option too that would let you keep the seccomp protections in place.