linux-kernel - Re: F_DUPFD_CLOEXEC implementation

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Message-Id: <200709300131.49320.vda.linux@googlemail.com>
Date:	Sun, 30 Sep 2007 01:31:49 +0100
From:	Denys Vlasenko <vda.linux@...glemail.com>
To:	Ulrich Drepper <drepper@...hat.com>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: F_DUPFD_CLOEXEC implementation

Hi Ulrich,

On Friday 28 September 2007 18:34, Ulrich Drepper wrote:
> One more small change to extend the availability of creation of
> file descriptors with FD_CLOEXEC set.  Adding a new command to
> fcntl() requires no new system call and the overall impact on
> code size if minimal.

Tangential question: do you have any idea how userspace can
safely do nonblocking read or write on a potentially-shared fd?

IIUC, currently it cannot be done without races:

old_flags = fcntl(fd, F_GETFL);
...other process may change flags!...
fcntl(fd, F_SETFL, old_flags | O_NONBLOCK);
read(fd, ...)
...other process may see flags changed under its feet!...
fcntl(fd, F_SETFL, old_flags);

Can this be fixed?
--
vda
-
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/