[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1475103281-7989-2-git-send-email-jann@thejh.net>
Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2016 00:54:39 +0200
From: Jann Horn <jann@...jh.net>
To: security@...nel.org, Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
Paul Moore <paul@...l-moore.com>,
Stephen Smalley <sds@...ho.nsa.gov>,
Eric Paris <eparis@...isplace.org>,
James Morris <james.l.morris@...cle.com>,
"Serge E. Hallyn" <serge@...lyn.com>
Cc: Nick Kralevich <nnk@...gle.com>,
Janis Danisevskis <jdanis@...gle.com>,
linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH v2 1/3] fs/exec: don't force writing memory access
This shouldn't change behavior in any way - at this point, there should be
no non-writable mappings, only the initial stack mapping -, but this change
makes it easier to reason about the correctness of the following commits
that place restrictions on forced memory writes.
Signed-off-by: Jann Horn <jann@...jh.net>
Reviewed-by: Janis Danisevskis <jdanis@...roid.com>
---
fs/exec.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/fs/exec.c b/fs/exec.c
index 6fcfb3f..d607da8 100644
--- a/fs/exec.c
+++ b/fs/exec.c
@@ -204,7 +204,7 @@ static struct page *get_arg_page(struct linux_binprm *bprm, unsigned long pos,
* doing the exec and bprm->mm is the new process's mm.
*/
ret = get_user_pages_remote(current, bprm->mm, pos, 1, write,
- 1, &page, NULL);
+ 0, &page, NULL);
if (ret <= 0)
return NULL;
--
2.1.4
Powered by blists - more mailing lists