linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] Make PTRACE_SEIZE set ptrace options specified in 'data' parameter

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20110913080004.GF11397@mtj.dyndns.org>
Date:	Tue, 13 Sep 2011 17:00:04 +0900
From:	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To:	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
Cc:	Denys Vlasenko <vda.linux@...glemail.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, dvlasenk@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] Make PTRACE_SEIZE set ptrace options specified in
 'data' parameter

On Sun, Sep 11, 2011 at 08:14:42PM +0200, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> We need to rework the locking, yes. But we need the lock which protects
> the parent's list_head (currently we rely on tasklist). Yes, a single
> lock can't help. We already use ->cred_guard_mutex though.
> 
> This needs more thinking, but imho child->siglock is pointless here.

But we can at least guarantee that if ->ptrace is set (or clear) while
tracee's siglock is held, its ->parent points to the tracer (or not).
At any rate, AFAICS, this currently doesn't really matter.  I
suggested it mainly because it would make the locking change easier.

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/