[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4D079541.3090405@kernel.org>
Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2010 17:03:13 +0100
From: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
CC: "Suzuki K. Poulose" <suzuki@...ibm.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy.fitzhardinge@...rix.com>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...hat.com>,
Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli <ananth@...ibm.com>,
Daisuke HATAYAMA <d.hatayama@...fujitsu.com>,
Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
Roland McGrath <roland@...hat.com>,
Amerigo Wang <amwang@...hat.com>,
KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>,
KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC] [Patch 0/21] Non disruptive application core dump infrastructure
Hello,
On 12/14/2010 04:49 PM, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 14, 2010 at 1:52 AM, Suzuki K. Poulose <suzuki@...ibm.com> wrote:
>>
>> This is series of patches implementing an infrastructure for capturing the core
>> of an application without disrupting its process semantics.
>>
>> The infrastructure makes use of the freezer subsystem in kernel to freeze the
>> threads and then collect the information to generate the core.
>
> This seems to be a fundamentally flawed approach.
>
>>>From a security standpoint, it looks like a total disaster. A frozen
> process is really hard to get rid of, so it looks like an obvious DoS
> attack to just create lots of processes, then sneakily freeze them
> all, and then laugh at the poor system admin who has no idea what's
> going on. While frozen, the things are basically unkillable but look
> entirely normal, no?
I think a better way would be adding a ptrace attach which is nestable
and doesn't have the nasty side effect caused by the interactions
between the implicit SIGSTOP and group stop. As a preparation step, I
posted a patchset to cleanup the interactions between ptrace and group
stop which is being reviewed. Once we have a nestable ptrace attach,
we should be able to simply adapt gcore(1) to use it and write out
core dump from userland.
Thanks.
--
tejun
--
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