linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/2] fs: introduce sendfd() syscall

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: <1417524607.5303.45.camel@edumazet-glaptop2.roam.corp.google.com>
Date:	Tue, 02 Dec 2014 04:50:07 -0800
From:	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
To:	Alex Dubov <alex.dubov@...il.com>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Alex Dubov <oakad@...oo.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] fs: introduce sendfd() syscall

On Tue, 2014-12-02 at 15:35 +1100, Alex Dubov wrote:
> Present patch introduces exceptionally easy to use, low latency and low
> overhead mechanism for transferring file descriptors between cooperating
> processes:
> 
>     int sendfd(pid_t pid, int sig, int fd)
> 
> Given a target process pid, the sendfd() syscall will create a duplicate
> file descriptor in a target task's (referred by pid) file table pointing to
> the file references by descriptor fd. Then, it will attempt to notify the
> target task by issuing a Posix.1b real-time signal (sig), carrying the new
> file descriptor as integer payload. If real-time signal can not be enqueued
> at the destination signal queue, the newly created file descriptor will be
> promptly closed.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Alex Dubov <oakad@...oo.com>
> ---

User A can send fd(s) to processes belonging to user B, even if user B
does (probably) not want this to happen ?

Also, relying on signals seems quite old fashion these days. How about
multi-threaded programs wanting separate channels to receive fds ?

Ability to flood fds and fill target file descriptors table looks very
dangerous to me. Some programs could break as they expect they control
fd allocations.

I like the idea of not having to use AF_UNIX and stick to a well defined
interface, but I do not like this asynchronous model.

Thanks.


--
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/