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]
Date:	Tue, 26 Aug 2008 16:04:15 +0200
From:	Pierre Morel <pmorel@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To:	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...sign.ru>
CC:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Roland McGrath <roland@...hat.com>,
	Heiko Carstens <heicars2@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	sameske@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
	Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@...ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC] [Patch 1/1] [Self Ptrace] System call notification with
 self_ptrace

Hello Oleg,

Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> On 08/25, Pierre Morel wrote:
>   
>> @@ -550,6 +550,23 @@ asmlinkage long sys_ptrace(long request,
>>  		goto out;
>>  	}
>>
>> +	if (request == PTRACE_SELF_ON) {
>> +		task_lock(current);
>> +		set_thread_flag(TIF_SYSCALL_TRACE);
>> +		current->ptrace |= PT_SELF;
>>     
>
> I didn't read the whole patch, but this sets PT_SELF without PT_PTRACED
> (and without ptrace_attach).
>   
Yes it is the way it is intended to work.
PT_SELF and other ptrace requests are not correlated,
I use the ptrace infrastructure to take advantage
of the existing system call interception framework.
> We have some "->ptrace != 0" checks which can misunderstand this. Just
> for example, suppose that the task does sys_ptrace(PTRACE_SELF_ON) and
> then its parent dies. I guess in that case forget_original_parent()
> will hit BUG_ON(p->ptrace), no?
>
>   
Yes you are right, I will take care of those cases.
I have the choice between:

- tracking all references to the ptrace flags and add a test for PT_SELF
or a mask.

- add a dedicated task_struct entry to hold the PT_SELF flag

The second solution seems easier, simpler and more
readable but extends the task struct.

What do you think is the best way to do it?

> Oleg.
>
>   
Thanks,

Pierre




-- 
=============
Pierre Morel
RTOS and Embedded Linux

--
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/

Powered by blists - more mailing lists