linux-kernel - Re: Review of ptrace Yama ptrace

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: <0a832f69-71fc-0b3e-bdc6-4c17f5ceadf6@gmail.com>
Date:	Wed, 29 Jun 2016 06:49:47 +0200
From:	"Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)" <mtk.manpages@...il.com>
To:	Jann Horn <jann@...jh.net>, Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
Cc:	mtk.manpages@...il.com, Linux API <linux-api@...r.kernel.org>,
	linux-man <linux-man@...r.kernel.org>,
	linux-security-module <linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org>,
	lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Casey Schaufler <casey@...aufler-ca.com>,
	James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org>
Subject: Re: Review of ptrace Yama ptrace_scope description

Hi Jann,
...

>> So I've made that section of text:
>>
>>        A  process  that  has the CAP_SYS_PTRACE capability can update the
>>        /proc/sys/kernel/yama/ptrace_scope file with one of the  following
>>        values:
>>
>>        0 ("classic ptrace permissions")
>>               No  additional  restrictions  on  operations  that  perform
>>               PTRACE_MODE_ATTACH checks (beyond those imposed by the com‐
>>               moncap and other LSMs).
>>
>>               The use of PTRACE_TRACEME is unchanged.
>>
>>        1 ("restricted ptrace") [default value]
>>               When    performing    an    operation   that   requires   a
>>               PTRACE_MODE_ATTACH check, the calling process  must  either
>>               have the CAP_SYS_PTRACE capability in the user namespace of
>>               the target process or it  have  a  predefined  relationship
>>               with  the target process.
>
> Nit: The grammar in this sentence seems wrong to me.
> s/or it have/or it must have/?

Yep, thanks for catching that. Fixed now.

Cheers,

Michael


-- 
Michael Kerrisk
Linux man-pages maintainer; http://www.kernel.org/doc/man-pages/
Linux/UNIX System Programming Training: http://man7.org/training/