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  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:   Fri, 22 Oct 2021 20:30:09 +0300
From:   Alexander Popov <>
To:     "Eric W. Biederman" <>
Cc:     Linus Torvalds <>,
        Petr Mladek <>,
        "Paul E. McKenney" <>,
        Jonathan Corbet <>,
        Andrew Morton <>,
        Thomas Gleixner <>,
        Peter Zijlstra <>,
        Joerg Roedel <>,
        Maciej Rozycki <>,
        Muchun Song <>,
        Viresh Kumar <>,
        Robin Murphy <>,
        Randy Dunlap <>,
        Lu Baolu <>,
        Kees Cook <>,
        Luis Chamberlain <>, Wei Liu <>,
        John Ogness <>,
        Andy Shevchenko <>,
        Alexey Kardashevskiy <>,
        Christophe Leroy <>,
        Jann Horn <>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <>,
        Mark Rutland <>,
        Andy Lutomirski <>,
        Dave Hansen <>,
        Steven Rostedt <>,
        Will Deacon <>,
        David S Miller <>,
        Borislav Petkov <>,
        Kernel Hardening <>,,
        "open list:DOCUMENTATION" <>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <>,
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Introduce the pkill_on_warn boot parameter

On 05.10.2021 22:48, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> Especially as calling do_group_exit(SIGKILL) from a random location is
> not a clean way to kill a process.  Strictly speaking it is not even
> killing the process.
> Partly this is just me seeing the introduction of a
> do_group_exit(SIGKILL) call and not likely the maintenance that will be
> needed.  I am still sorting out the problems with other randomly placed
> calls to do_group_exit(SIGKILL) and interactions with ptrace and
> PTRACE_EVENT_EXIT in particular.
> Which is a long winded way of saying if I can predictably trigger a
> warning that calls do_group_exit(SIGKILL), on some architectures I can
> use ptrace and  can convert that warning into a way to manipulate the
> kernel stack to have the contents of my choice.
> If anyone goes forward with this please use the existing oops
> infrastructure so the ptrace interactions and anything else that comes
> up only needs to be fixed once.

Hello Eric, hello everyone.

I learned the oops infrastructure and see that it's arch-specific.
The architectures have separate implementations of the die() function with 
different prototypes. I don't see how to use the oops infrastructure for killing 
all threads in a process that hits a kernel warning.

What do you think about doing the same as the oom_killer (and some other 
subsystems)? It kills all threads in a process this way:
   do_send_sig_info(SIGKILL, SEND_SIG_PRIV, current, PIDTYPE_TGID).

The oom_killer also shows a nice way to avoid killing init and kthreads:
	static bool oom_unkillable_task(struct task_struct *p)
		if (is_global_init(p))
			return true;
		if (p->flags & PF_KTHREAD)
			return true;
		return false;
I want to do something similar.

I would appreciate your comments.
Best regards,

Powered by blists - more mailing lists