linux-kernel - Re: [RFC][PATCH 4/6][v3] Define siginfo_from_ancestor

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:	Mon, 22 Dec 2008 23:26:04 +0100
From:	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
To:	Sukadev Bhattiprolu <sukadev@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc:	ebiederm@...ssion.com, roland@...hat.com, bastian@...di.eu.org,
	daniel@...ac.com, xemul@...nvz.org, containers@...ts.osdl.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, sukadev@...ibm.com
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 4/6][v3] Define siginfo_from_ancestor_ns()

On 12/20, Sukadev Bhattiprolu wrote:
>
> + * TODO:
> + * 	  Making SI_ASYNCIO a kernel signal could make this less hacky.
> + */
> +#ifdef CONFIG_PID_NS
> +static inline int siginfo_from_user(siginfo_t *info)
> +{
> +	if (!is_si_special(info) && SI_FROMUSER(info) &&

OK, if we can trust SI_FROMUSER(), then it is better, i agree.

I was worried about in-kernel usage of .si_code <= 0 ...

> +				info->si_code != SI_ASYNCIO)

but this is horrible, imho.

OK, if we can't change the ABI, then perhaps we can change
kill_pid_info_as_uid() to not send the fatal signals to UNKILLABLE
task? This helper is strange and ugly anyway,

To clarify, I do not blame the patch itself, and I do not suggest
to do this right now.

Oleg.

--
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/