linux-kernel - Re: execve(NULL, argv, envp) for nommu?

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: <20170905142436.262ed118@alans-desktop>
Date:   Tue, 5 Sep 2017 14:24:36 +0100
From:   Alan Cox <gnomes@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
To:     Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>
Cc:     Rob Landley <rob@...dley.net>,
        Linux Embedded <linux-embedded@...r.kernel.org>,
        Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: execve(NULL, argv, envp) for nommu?

> > anymore. But I'm already _running_ this program. If I could fork() I
> > could already get a second copy of the sucker and call main() again
> > myself if necessary, but I can't, so...

You can - ptrace 8)

> > honoring the suid bit if people feel that way. I just wanna unblock
> > vfork() while still running this code. 

Would it make more sense to have a way to promote your vfork into a
fork when you hit these cases (I appreciate that fork on NOMMU has a much
higher performance cost as you start having to softmmu copy or swap
pages).

Alan