linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] set*uid() must not fail-and-return on OOM/rlimits

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	21 Aug 2006 08:05:41 +0300
From:	Kari Hurtta <hurtta+gmane@...lo.fmi.fi>
To:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject:  Re: [PATCH] set*uid() must not fail-and-return on OOM/rlimits

Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk> writes:

> Ar Sul, 2006-08-20 am 10:52 +0300, ysgrifennodd Kari Hurtta:
> > Perhaps stupid suggestion:
> > 
> > Should there be new signal for 'failure to drop privileges' ?
> > ( perhaps SIGPRIV or is this name free )
> > 
> > By default signal terminates process.  
> 
> Programs are allowed (and now and then do) intentionally let a setuid
> fail. A custom selinux or audit rule might be appropriate but that kind
> of hackery is not.

Commented code/patch used SIGKILL.  By allocating new signal programs
_are_ allowed intentionally let a setuid fail.

/ Kari Hurtta

-
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/