linux-kernel - Re: [RFC][PATCH 07/11] signal: Deliver group signals via PIDTYPE_TGID not PIDTYPE

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: <CA+55aFx5gP+1coJ92v4jYgTVfatnOoN3mqrerPEGxadZE2rKNg@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 17 Jul 2018 09:38:44 -0700
From:   Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To:     "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>
Cc:     Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Wen Yang <wen.yang99@....com.cn>, majiang <ma.jiang@....com.cn>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 07/11] signal: Deliver group signals via PIDTYPE_TGID
 not PIDTYPE_PID

On Mon, Jul 16, 2018 at 7:50 AM Eric W. Biederman <ebiederm@...ssion.com> wrote:
>
> In practice since glibc does not make thread id's available I don't
> expect anyone relies on this behavior.  Since no one relies on it we
> can change it without creating a regression.

Actually, there's a really obvious case where this simply isn't true.

Just imagine you're a MIS person or a developer, doing "ps -eLf" to
see what's going on, and want to kill one thread. Either because you
see that one thread using all CPU, or because you are the developer
and you know what's up.

Those thread ID's are exported trivially.

               Linus