linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] um: Fix get

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20160109035125.GA365@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
Date:	Sat, 9 Jan 2016 03:51:25 +0000
From:	Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>
To:	Richard Weinberger <richard@....at>
Cc:	user-mode-linux-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, stable@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] um: Fix get_signal() usage

On Wed, Nov 18, 2015 at 09:51:43AM +0100, Richard Weinberger wrote:
> If get_signal() returns us a signal to post
> we must not call it again, otherwise the already
> posted signal will be overridden.
> Before commit a610d6e672d this was the case as we stopped
> the while after a successful handle_signal().

Old behaviour had been wrong.  If you have several pending signals,
more than one sigframe should be built, as if the second, etc. had
been delivered right on the entry into the handler.

Stopping after the first one is obviously wrong - consider the case
when attempt to deliver it has raised SIGSEGV.