linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/1] signal: make group kill signal fatal

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, 25 May 2009 02:07:50 +0200
From:	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
To:	Jiri Slaby <jirislaby@...il.com>
Cc:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, ebiederm@...ssion.com,
	roland@...hat.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Matthew Wilcox <matthew@....cx>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] signal: make group kill signal fatal

On 05/24, Jiri Slaby wrote:
>
> __fatal_signal_pending() returns now true only for a non-group sent
> sigkill, i. e. for example tgkill, send_sig...

No. Please look at complete_signal(). If we queue a fatal signal,
we always add SIGKILL to any thread.

> Use sigkill_pending()

Please do not use it, it should die.

> in __fatal_signal_pending() which adds a test also
> for shared_pending queue.

See above. Afaics this is not needed.

> Also grab siglock in __fatal_signal_pending().

This is wrong. It can be called when the task has already died
and its ->signal == NULL.

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/