[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1241610407.27629.8.camel@localhost.localdomain>
Date: Wed, 06 May 2009 07:46:47 -0400
From: Stephen Smalley <sds@...ho.nsa.gov>
To: James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org>
Cc: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Roland McGrath <roland@...hat.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
Eric Paris <eparis@...isplace.org>,
Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] do_wait: do take security_task_wait() into account
On Fri, 2009-05-01 at 08:51 +1000, James Morris wrote:
> On Wed, 29 Apr 2009, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
>
> > I was never able to understand what should we actually do when
> > security_task_wait() fails, but the current code doesn't look right.
> >
> > If ->task_wait() returns the error, we update *notask_error correctly.
> > But then we either reap the child (despite the fact this was forbidden)
> > or clear *notask_error (and hide the securiy policy problems).
> >
> > This patch assumes that "stolen by ptrace" doesn't matter. If selinux
> > denies the child we should ignore it but make sure we report -EACCESS
> > instead of -ECHLD if there are no other eligible children.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
>
> Applied to:
> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/jmorris/security-testing-2.6#next
FWIW, I confirmed that this corrected a FAIL in the ltp selinux
testsuite (wait test).
Tested-by: Stephen Smalley <sds@...ho.nsa.gov>
--
Stephen Smalley
National Security Agency
--
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