linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/3] Infiniband: make ehca_pd use struct pid pointer rather than pid

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: <OFCEB1A067.C70D2E66-ONC1257410.0055A0B0-C1257410.005729C4@de.ibm.com>
Date:	Tue, 18 Mar 2008 16:52:27 +0100
From:	Hoang-Nam Nguyen <HNGUYEN@...ibm.com>
To:	Roland Dreier <rdreier@...co.com>
Cc:	Christoph Raisch <raisch@...ibm.com>,
	general@...ts.openfabrics.org,
	Hal Rosenstock <hal.rosenstock@...il.com>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Roland Dreier <rolandd@...co.com>,
	Sean Hefty <sean.hefty@...el.com>,
	Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@...nvz.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] Infiniband: make ehca_pd use struct pid pointer rather than
 pid_t

Hi Roland!
>  > The task_struct->tgid field is about to become deprecated, due to
>  > pid namespaces make tasks have many pids, not one. The infiniband
>  > driver is one of the code, that still uses it in some places.
>
> Looks fine in terms of the changes it makes, but actually it seems
> that the ehca use of this is completely bogus and the ownership
> checking should be removed.
>
> The core ib_uverbs module has checks that make sure that objects can
> only be accessed through the file that they were created through; of
> course there are tricky ways a file can be passed from one process to
> another, but I don't think we want to disallow userspace processes
> from trying to do interesting stuff as long as it doesn't hurt anything.
>
> In other words-- ehca shouldn't be looking at tgids or anything like
> that at all.  If there are missing checks then they should be in the
> core userspace verbs stuff; but I think what we have is actually OK.
>
> ehca guys, what do you think?
Reason for above checking is to prevent a child process releasing
a resource that the parent process has created and still wants to use.
Do you think that's something we can generalize into ib_core?
Regards
Nam

--
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/