[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20150109210941.GL22149@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2015 21:09:41 +0000
From: Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>
To: Rich Felker <dalias@...ifal.cx>
Cc: David Drysdale <drysdale@...gle.com>,
"Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)" <mtk.manpages@...il.com>,
"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>,
Meredydd Luff <meredydd@...atehouse.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>, X86 ML <x86@...nel.org>,
linux-arch <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux API <linux-api@...r.kernel.org>,
sparclinux@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCHv10 man-pages 5/5] execveat.2: initial man page for
execveat(2)
On Fri, Jan 09, 2015 at 03:59:26PM -0500, Rich Felker wrote:
> > For fsck sake, folks, if you have bloody /proc, you don't need that shite
> > at all! Just do execve on /proc/self/fd/n, and be done with that.
> >
> > The sole excuse for merging that thing in the first place had been
> > "would anybody think of children^Wsclerotic^Whardened environments
> > where they have no /proc at all".
>
> That doesn't work. With O_CLOEXEC, /proc/self/fd/n is already gone at
> the time the interpreter runs, whether you're using fexecveat or
> execve with "/proc/self/fd/n" to implement POSIX fexecve(). That's the
> problem. This breaks the intended idiom for fexecve.
Just what will your magical symlink do in case when the file is opened,
unlinked and marked O_CLOEXEC? When should actual freeing of disk blocks,
etc. happen? And no, you can't assume that interpreter will open the
damn thing even once - there's nothing to oblige it to do so.
Al, more and more tempted to ask reverting the whole thing - this hardcoded
/dev/fd/... (in fs/exec.c, no less) is disgraceful enough, but threats of
even more revolting kludges in the name of "intended idiom for fexecve"...
--
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