linux-kernel - Re: [RFC] Proposal for ptrace improvements

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Thu, 3 Mar 2011 20:26:30 +0100
From:	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
To:	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
Cc:	Denys Vlasenko <vda.linux@...glemail.com>,
	Roland McGrath <roland@...hat.com>, jan.kratochvil@...hat.com,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org,
	akpm@...ux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [RFC] Proposal for ptrace improvements

On 03/02, Tejun Heo wrote:
>
> Hey,
>
> On Wed, Mar 02, 2011 at 12:02:37PM +0100, Denys Vlasenko wrote:
> > What do you think about SIGSTOP generated in in children on auto-attach
> > via PTRACE_O_TRACE[V]FORK / PTRACE_O_TRACECLONE options?
>
> Ah, you're right.  I actually haven't been thinking about them.
>
> > IMHO, it would be good if we'd have a way to distinguish them from
> > real SIGSTOP signals.
>
> Yeah, probably.

Perhaps... but at first glance I think we should not change this
at all.

We are not going to change PTRACE_ATTACH, we can't. We are going
to add the new request which avoids tkill(SIGSTOP). The same with
PTRACE_O_TRACECLONE/etc imho. We need the better control on
auto-attach, but this needs another discussion.

Oleg.

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