[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20110916181146.GA20801@albatros>
Date: Fri, 16 Sep 2011 22:11:46 +0400
From: Vasiliy Kulikov <segoon@...nwall.com>
To: Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@...il.com>
Cc: Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>, Andrew Morton <akpm00@...il.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, containers@...ts.osdl.org,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
Kirill Shutemov <kirill@...temov.name>,
Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@...allels.com>,
James Bottomley <jbottomley@...allels.com>,
Nathan Lynch <ntl@...ox.com>, Zan Lynx <zlynx@....org>,
Daniel Lezcano <dlezcano@...ibm.com>,
Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...il.com>,
Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [patch 2/2] fs, proc: Introduce the /proc/<pid>/map_files/
directory v12
On Fri, Sep 16, 2011 at 22:07 +0400, Cyrill Gorcunov wrote:
> > BTW, not a big deal, but probably you should return -EACCES on
> > !capable() as file presence is not an issue in this case.
> >
> > if (!ptrace_may_access(task, PTRACE_MODE_READ))
> > goto out_notask;
> >
> > status = -EACCES;
> > if (!capable(CAP_SYS_ADMIN))
> > goto out_notask;
> >
> > status = 0;
> >
> >
>
> That's not a proble to fix it actually. So can I fix it and
> put some tage here (Reviewed or something?).
Yep, with CAP_SYS_ADMIN check there should be no issues here.
Reviewed-by: Vasiliy Kulikov <segoon@...nwall.com>
Thanks,
--
Vasiliy Kulikov
http://www.openwall.com - bringing security into open computing environments
--
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