linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/9] exec: add a global execve counter

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]

Message-ID: <20120312143400.GA23113@redhat.com>
Date:	Mon, 12 Mar 2012 15:34:00 +0100
From:	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
To:	Djalal Harouni <tixxdz@...ndz.org>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
	Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...il.com>,
	"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
	Vasiliy Kulikov <segoon@...nwall.com>,
	Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
	Solar Designer <solar@...nwall.com>,
	WANG Cong <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>,
	James Morris <james.l.morris@...cle.com>,
	linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
	Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, Stephen Wilson <wilsons@...rt.ca>,
	"Jason A. Donenfeld" <Jason@...c4.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/9] exec: add a global execve counter

On 03/12, Djalal Harouni wrote:
>
> On Sun, Mar 11, 2012 at 06:25:12PM +0100, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> >
> > Well, I don't think it is right to add this counter into task_struct.
> >
> > It should be per-process, signal_struct makes more sense. Or may be
> > mm_struct.
> Some /proc/<pid>/{syscall,stack,...} do not operate on mm_struct so why we
> should add the: "acquire a reference to mm, get exec_id and mmput".

This could be simpler, just read the counter under task_lock(). And
unless I misread the next patches syscall/stack can use current->mm
lockless.

OK, nevermind.

> For the signal_struct currently I don't know, from a comment it seems that
> signal_struct can be shared!

Yes, it is shared, and that is why it makes sense for the per-process
data. All threads in the thread group (process) have the same ->signal.
And unlike ->mm, ->signal survives after exec.

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/