[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20101215110446.157bbb25@suzukikp>
Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2010 11:04:46 +0530
From: "Suzuki K. Poulose" <suzuki@...ibm.com>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: 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
On Tue, 14 Dec 2010 07:49:37 -0800
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> 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?
You are right. We need a simple mechanism to hold the threads, so that we
could collect the register information of the process without affecting its
process semantics (eg, signals etc.). The suggestion by Kamezawa-san -a
freeze state variant which allows SIGKILL - is one possibility.
I'd be very glad not using the freezer if there is a neat way to accomplish
this without the undesired side effects. Tejun's ptrace enhancement would
still require a userland program to control it(gcore); something contained
in the kernel would be ideal.
Thanks
Suzuki
>
> Linus
--
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