linux-kernel - [PATCH 0/1] (Was: self_exec_id/parent_exec_id && CLONE

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]

Date:	Wed, 14 Mar 2012 19:55:10 +0100
From:	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
To:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:	Djalal Harouni <tixxdz@...ndz.org>,
	Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com,
	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,
	Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, Stephen Wilson <wilsons@...rt.ca>,
	"Jason A. Donenfeld" <Jason@...c4.com>,
	Roland McGrath <roland@...k.frob.com>
Subject: [PATCH 0/1] (Was: self_exec_id/parent_exec_id && CLONE_PARENT)

On 03/11, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
> On Sun, Mar 11, 2012 at 10:49 AM, Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com> wrote:
> >
> > I am also asking because the change above looks like the fix to me.
> > The child must not control its ->exit_signal, it is the parent who
> > decides which signal the child should use for notification.
> >
> > And to me, clone(CLONE_PARENT | SIGXXX) looks like a violation of
> > rule above.
>
> SIGXXX is for doing things like AIO with threads, but it would never
> be used together with CLONE_PARENT, that would be odd and wrong.
>
> So I think we could disallow that - or at least try. See if anybody
> notices, and if it breaks anything.
>
> The rule about the Linux ABI is not that the ABI is set in stone. It's
> that we can't break any existing binaries. And *maybe* there are users
> of CLONE_PARENT and special signals, but it sounds unlikely and would
> probably confuse real programs. So feel free to just try it (early in
> the 3.4 merge window - not at this point, though).

OK, nobody seems to object.

Andrew, could you take this patch?

As for self_exec_id/parent_exec_id, this needs cleanups and fixes
in any case. But perhaps we can kill them after this change.

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/