linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] allow execve'ing "/proc/self/exe" even if /proc is not mounted

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: <1158166a0906260100q79475523l546cddde2c0ca03@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Fri, 26 Jun 2009 10:00:32 +0200
From:	Denys Vlasenko <vda.linux@...glemail.com>
To:	Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
	Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>
Cc:	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Mike Frysinger <vapier@...too.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] allow execve'ing "/proc/self/exe" even if /proc is not 
	mounted

On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 10:10 AM, Alan Cox<alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk> wrote:
>> With this patch, it is possible to execute /proc/self/exe
>> even if /proc is not mounted. In the below example,
>> ./sh is a static shell binary:
>
> What if the user has procfs mounted somewherelse, what if they are in a
> chroot where you don't want them to patch the binary and re-exec it ?
>
> It would be far far cleaner for NOMMU to have a NOMMU private "reexec()"
> call that didn't rely on procfs or hacking names into the kernel.
>
> So NAK

I am ok with it. Are other people ok with adding a syscall
just for this purpose? Al?
--
vda
--
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/