linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/2] protect /sbin/init from unwanted signals more

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: <20081120030449.864B515423A@magilla.localdomain>
Date:	Wed, 19 Nov 2008 19:04:49 -0800 (PST)
From:	Roland McGrath <roland@...hat.com>
To:	ebiederm@...ssion.com (Eric W. Biederman)
Cc:	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@...nvz.org>,
	"Serge E. Hallyn" <serue@...ibm.com>,
	Sukadev Bhattiprolu <sukadev@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] protect /sbin/init from unwanted signals more

> inits today don't do anything with blocked signals.  They explicitly ignore all signals,
> they don't want to deal with an enable those they do.

I don't think we should constrain them this way.  
Future init versions might want to use blocked signals and sigwait.

> Which reminds me.  I need to retest, but I had a case where I had a
> trivial init that set all signal handlers to SIG_IGN so it could ignore
> SIGCHLD.  And not all of it's children were getting reaped automagically.
> Do we have a bug in the reparenting/reaping logic?

We have had bugs along those lines in the past.
AFAIK we've licked them all now.  Re-testing is in order.


Thanks,
Roland
--
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/