linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/8] make vfork killable/restartable/traceable

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:	Wed, 27 Jul 2011 23:38:14 +0100
From:	Pedro Alves <pedro@...esourcery.com>
To:	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
Cc:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Roland McGrath <roland@...k.frob.com>,
	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
	Denys Vlasenko <dvlasenk@...hat.com>,
	KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>,
	Matt Fleming <matt.fleming@...ux.intel.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/8] make vfork killable/restartable/traceable

On Wednesday 27 July 2011 17:31:59, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> Hello.
> 
> CLONE_VFORK sleeps in TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE until the child exits/execs.
> This is obviously not good, it is sooo simple to create the task which
> doesn't react to SIGKILL/SIGSTOP.
> 
> Questions:
> 
> 	- do we really need this?
> 
> 	  I think we do. This really "looks like a bug" in any case,
> 	  even if nobody ever complained afaik.
> 
> 	- may be 1-3 is enough?
> 
> 	  may be... but personally I think SIGSTOP/ptrace should work
> 	  too.

Thanks, me too.  If not SIGSTOP, then PTRACE_STOP.  The fact that it
doesn't has led to the need for workarounds in gdb.  Do you see
any way gdb will be able to check at runtime its workarounds
won't be needed anymore ?

-- 
Pedro Alves
--
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/