linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/4] signals: SEND_SIG_NOINFO should be considered as SI

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:	Sun, 4 Oct 2009 04:25:56 +0200
From:	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
To:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Sukadev Bhattiprolu <sukadev@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc:	Daniel Lezcano <dlezcano@...ibm.com>,
	Sukadev Bhattiprolu <sukadev@...ibm.com>,
	Linux Containers <containers@...ts.osdl.org>,
	roland@...hat.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] signals: SEND_SIG_NOINFO should be considered as
	SI_FROMUSER()

On 10/04, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
>
> No changes in compiled code. The patch adds the new helper, si_fromuser()
> and changes check_kill_permission() to use this helper.
>
> The real effect of this patch is that from now we "officially" consider
> SEND_SIG_NOINFO signal as "from user-space" signals. This is already true
> if we look at the code which uses SEND_SIG_NOINFO, except __send_signal()
> has another opinion - see the next patch.
>
> The naming of these special SEND_SIG_XXX siginfo's is really bad imho.
> From __send_signal()'s pov they mean
>
> 	SEND_SIG_NOINFO		from user

To clarify, "from user" for SEND_SIG_NOINFO/SI_USER mean: sent by kernel
on behalf of some process. We should check permissions, sub-namespace,
we should fill si_pid/uid, etc.

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/