linux-kernel - Re: [RFC] [PATCH 00/19] Non disruptive application core dump infrastructure using task_work

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: <20131007185748.GE27396@htj.dyndns.org>
Date:	Mon, 7 Oct 2013 14:57:48 -0400
From:	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To:	Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@...allels.com>
Cc:	Janani Venkataraman <jananive@...ibm.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, amwang@...hat.com,
	rdunlap@...otime.net, andi@...stfloor.org,
	aravinda@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, hch@....de, mhiramat@...hat.com,
	jeremy.fitzhardinge@...rix.com, suzuki@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
	kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com, adobriyan@...il.com,
	tarundsk@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, vapier@...too.org,
	roland@...k.frob.com, ananth@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
	gorcunov@...nvz.org, avagin@...nvz.org, oleg@...hat.com,
	eparis@...hat.com, d.hatayama@...fujitsu.com,
	james.hogan@...tec.com, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
	torvalds@...ux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [RFC] [PATCH 00/19] Non disruptive application core dump
 infrastructure using task_work_add()

Hello,

On Fri, Oct 04, 2013 at 02:38:43PM +0400, Pavel Emelyanov wrote:
> > * It is not upstream yet.
> 
> It is, starting from criu-v0.7 + linux-3.11
> 
> > * There are concerns about the security of the dump.
> 
> Can you elaborate on this? Is it fixable in CRIU at all?
> 
> > * It involves a lot of changes and this approach provides a UNIX style 
> >   interface.
> 
> Can you also shed more light on this -- what changes do you mean?

Yeah, I'd like to hear more too.  It doesn't make much sense to me to
add something completely new if it can be served mostly by the
existing infrastructure.  Also, what do you mean by "disruption"?  You
mentioned signal but PTRACE_SEIZE is completely transparent
w.r.t. signals.  If you mean without stopping the target process's
execution, what are you trying to use the dumping for and how much
gain are we talking about?  Also, isn't it kinda mandatory to stop the
process to get a consistent dump?  What am I missing here?

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/