[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20151109131902.db961a5fe7b7fcbeb14f72fc@linux-foundation.org>
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2015 13:19:02 -0800
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Jann Horn <jann@...jh.net>
Cc: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
James Morris <james.l.morris@...cle.com>,
"Serge E. Hallyn" <serge.hallyn@...ntu.com>,
Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Michael Kerrisk <mtk.manpages@...il.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org, linux-api@...r.kernel.org,
security@...nel.org, Willy Tarreau <w@....eu>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ptrace: use fsuid, fsgid, effective creds for fs access
checks
On Mon, 9 Nov 2015 22:12:09 +0100 Jann Horn <jann@...jh.net> wrote:
>
> > Can we do
> >
> > #define PTRACE_foo (PTRACE_MODE_READ|PTRACE_MODE_FSCREDS)
> >
> > to avoid all that?
>
> Hm. All combinations of the PTRACE_MODE_*CREDS flags with
> PTRACE_MODE_{READ,ATTACH} plus optionally PTRACE_MODE_NOAUDIT
> make sense, I think. So your suggestion would be to create
> four new #defines
> PTRACE_MODE_{READ,ATTACH}_{FSCREDS,REALCREDS} and then let
> callers OR in the PTRACE_MODE_NOAUDIT flag if needed?
If these flag combinations have an identifiable concept behind them then
sure, it makes sense to capture that via a well-chosen identifier.
--
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