linux-kernel - Re: RELEASE BLOCKER: Linux doesn't follow x86/x86-64 ABI wrt direction flag

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]

Message-ID: <47D0495F.2090109@gnu.org>
Date:	Thu, 06 Mar 2008 20:43:27 +0100
From:	Paolo Bonzini <bonzini@....org>
To:	gcc@....gnu.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: RELEASE BLOCKER: Linux doesn't follow x86/x86-64 ABI wrt direction
    flag

Jack Lloyd wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 06, 2008 at 07:13:20PM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>> A process can send a signal via kill.  IOW, a malicious process can 
>> *control when the process would be interrupted* in order to get it into 
>> the signal handler with DF=1.
> 
> If the malicious process can send a signal to another process, it
> could also ptrace() it. Which is more useful, if you wanted to be
> malicious?

1) capabilities(7)

2) sometimes setuid programs send signals (e.g. SIGHUP or SIGUSR1)...

Paolo
--
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/