linux-kernel - Re: [RFC][PATCH] Notify init when processes are reparented to it

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Sun, 28 Dec 2008 10:20:24 +0100
From:	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
To:	Scott James Remnant <scott@...onical.com>
Cc:	lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Roland McGrath <roland@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] Notify init when processes are reparented to it

On 12/27, Scott James Remnant wrote:
>
> Allow the init daemon to be notified by signal when processes are
> reparented to it.  The signal has the same form as SIGCHLD except that
> the si_status field contains the original parent proecss id.

I think the changelog should explain why this change is useful.

I can't judge the usefulness, just a couple of nits about the
code.

> +++ b/include/linux/sched.h
> @@ -1133,6 +1133,7 @@ struct task_struct {
>  	int exit_state;
>  	int exit_code, exit_signal;
>  	int pdeath_signal;  /*  The signal sent when the parent dies  */
> +	int adopt_signal;  /*  The signal sent when a process is reparented  */

Should be cleared in copy_process() ?

And what if init is multithreaded? This should be per-process, not
per-thread.

> --- a/kernel/exit.c
> +++ b/kernel/exit.c
> @@ -813,6 +813,9 @@ static void reparent_thread(struct task_struct *p, struct task_struct *father)
>  		/* We already hold the tasklist_lock here.  */
>  		group_send_sig_info(p->pdeath_signal, SEND_SIG_NOINFO, p);
>
> +	if (p->real_parent->adopt_signal)
> +		do_notify_parent_adopted(p, father);
> +

Please note that we notify the new parent even if we re-parent to our
sub-thread, not to the new process. This means that a multithreaded
init can have the false notifications.

And, given that ->adopt_signal is per-thread, a multithreaded init
should be very careful with prctl(PR_SET_ADOPTSIG) if it does not
want to miss the notification.

> +void do_notify_parent_adopted(struct task_struct *tsk, struct task_struct *father)
> +{
> +	struct siginfo info;
> +	unsigned long flags;
> +	struct task_struct *reaper;
> +	struct sighand_struct *sighand;
> +	int ret;
> +
> +	reaper = tsk->real_parent;
> +
> +	memset (&info, 0, sizeof info);

Unneeded? This function seems to fill all interesting fields.

> +	info.si_signo = reaper->adopt_signal;
> +	/*
> +	 * set code to the same range as SIGCHLD so the right bits of
> +	 * siginfo_t get copied, to userspace this will appear as si_code=0
> +	 */
> +	info.si_code = __SI_CHLD;
> +	/*
> +	 * see comment in do_notify_parent() about the following 4 lines
> +	 */
> +	rcu_read_lock();
> +	info.si_pid = task_pid_nr_ns(tsk, reaper->nsproxy->pid_ns);
> +	info.si_status = task_pid_nr_ns(father, reaper->nsproxy->pid_ns);

perhaps it is better to use task_active_pid_ns(reaper).

> +	rcu_read_unlock();
> +
> +	info.si_uid = tsk->uid;
> +
> +	info.si_utime = cputime_to_clock_t(tsk->utime);
> +	info.si_stime = cputime_to_clock_t(tsk->stime);
> +
> +	sighand = reaper->sighand;
> +	spin_lock_irqsave(&sighand->siglock, flags);
> +	__group_send_sig_info(reaper->adopt_signal, &info, reaper);

This looks unsafe.

At this point reaper can already change its ->adopt_signal. For example
if it was cleared, send_signal() can crash while doing (say) sigismember().

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/