[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <51123236.3060001@asianux.com>
Date: Wed, 06 Feb 2013 18:36:38 +0800
From: Chen Gang <gang.chen@...anux.com>
To: Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@...nvz.org>
CC: Chen Gang <gang.chen@...anux.com>, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
keescook@...omium.org, serge.hallyn@...onical.com,
ebiederm@...ssion.com,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>, marcel@...tmann.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] kernel: arg2 is unsigned long which is never < 0
于 2013年02月06日 16:56, Cyrill Gorcunov 写道:
> On Wed, Feb 06, 2013 at 04:44:35PM +0800, Chen Gang wrote:
>> >
>> > diff --git a/kernel/sys.c b/kernel/sys.c
>> > index 24d1ef5..568b9ca 100644
>> > --- a/kernel/sys.c
>> > +++ b/kernel/sys.c
>> > @@ -2027,7 +2027,7 @@ SYSCALL_DEFINE5(prctl, int, option, unsigned long, arg2, unsigned long, arg3,
>> > error = get_dumpable(me->mm);
>> > break;
>> > case PR_SET_DUMPABLE:
>> > - if (arg2 < 0 || arg2 > 1) {
>> > + if (arg2 > 1) {
>> > error = -EINVAL;
>> > break;
>> > }
> I guess
>
> if (arg2 != SUID_DUMPABLE_DISABLED &&
> arg2 != SUID_DUMPABLE_ENABLED) {
> error = -EINVAL;
> break;
> }
>
> would be better. Still, current patch looks good to me.
thank you for your suggestion, firstly.
and after read more, it seems a little more complex:
for me, I think it would be better:
if (arg2 != SUID_DUMP_DISABLE && arg2 != SUID_DUMP_USER) {
error = -EINVAL;
break;
}
the reason is below:
it has 2 branches:
branch 1:
#define SUID_DUMP_DISABLE 0 /* No setuid dumping */
#define SUID_DUMP_USER 1 /* Dump as user of process */
#define SUID_DUMP_ROOT 2 /* Dump as root */
in patch d6e711448137ca3301512cec41a2c2ce852b3d0a
Signed-of-by Alan Cox in 2005.
define these constant for using.
change 2 choices to 3 choices (add a new choice).
in patch abf75a5033d4da7b8a7e92321d74021d1fcfb502
Signed-of-by Marcel Holtmann in 2006.
find and fix a security issue for it.
branch 2:
#define SUID_DUMPABLE_DISABLED 0
#define SUID_DUMPABLE_ENABLED 1
#define SUID_DUMPABLE_SAFE 2
in patch 54b501992dd2a839e94e76aa392c392b55080ce8
Signed-of-by Kees Cook in Jul 30 2012
define the constants for using
print warning when detect unsafe core_pattern settings
in patch 0f4cfb2e4e7a7e4e97a3e90e2ba1062f07fb2cb1
Signed-of-by Oleg Nesterov in Oct 4 2012
use SUID_DUMPABLE_ENABLED rather than hardcoded 1
analysing:
branch 1 and branch 2 have the same values with different macro names.
branch 1 is much older than branch 2.
for features:
branch 1 is for functional feature and bug fix,
branch 2 is for printing warning and beautifying code.
it seems:
branch 2 did not notice the branch 1, before it performs.
if it noticed, it is meanless to define the new macros.
result:
still use the macros of branch 1
and use branch 1 macros instead of branch 2 macros (need an additional patch).
:-)
Regards.
--
Chen Gang
Asianux Corporation
--
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