linux-kernel - RE: [RFC PATCH] Implement /proc/pid/kill

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: <061df748f65d41b5bbd4749074dbce29@AcuMS.aculab.com>
Date:   Thu, 1 Nov 2018 11:53:15 +0000
From:   David Laight <David.Laight@...LAB.COM>
To:     'Daniel Colascione' <dancol@...gle.com>,
        Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
CC:     "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
        linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Tim Murray <timmurray@...gle.com>,
        "Joel Fernandes" <joelaf@...gle.com>,
        Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@...gle.com>,
        "Kees Cook" <keescook@...omium.org>,
        Christian Brauner <christian.brauner@...onical.com>
Subject: RE: [RFC PATCH] Implement /proc/pid/kill

From: Sent: 31 October 2018 13:28
...
> * I actually have a local variant of the patch that would have you
> open "/proc/$PID/kill/$SIGNO" instead, since different signal numbers
> have different permission checks.

I think you'd need the open() to specify some specific unusual
open modes.
Otherwise it'll be far too easy for scripts (and people) to
accidentally send every signal to every process.

Also think of the memory footprint.

	David

-
Registered Address Lakeside, Bramley Road, Mount Farm, Milton Keynes, MK1 1PT, UK
Registration No: 1397386 (Wales)