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  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]
Date:   Mon, 29 Apr 2019 22:38:06 +0200
From:   Florian Weimer <>
To:     Linus Torvalds <>
Cc:     Jann Horn <>, Kevin Easton <>,
        Andy Lutomirski <>,
        Christian Brauner <>,
        Aleksa Sarai <>,
        "Enrico Weigelt\, metux IT consult" <>,
        Al Viro <>,
        David Howells <>,
        Linux API <>,
        LKML <>,
        "Serge E. Hallyn" <>,
        Arnd Bergmann <>,
        "Eric W. Biederman" <>,
        Kees Cook <>,
        Thomas Gleixner <>,
        Michael Kerrisk <>,
        Andrew Morton <>,
        Oleg Nesterov <>,
        Joel Fernandes <>,
        Daniel Colascione <>
Subject: Re: RFC: on adding new CLONE_* flags [WAS Re: [PATCH 0/4] clone: add CLONE_PIDFD]

* Linus Torvalds:

> On Mon, Apr 29, 2019 at 12:55 PM Jann Horn <> wrote:
>> ... I guess that already has a name, and it's called vfork(). (Well,
>> except that the Linux vfork() isn't a real vfork().)
> What?
> Linux vfork() is very much a real vfork(). What do you mean?

In Linux-as-the-ABI (as opposed to Linux-as-the-implementation), vfork
is sometimes implemented as fork, so applications cannot rely on the
vfork behavior regarding the stopped parent and the shared address

In fact, it would be nice to have a flag we can check in the posix_spawn
implementation, so that we can support vfork-as-fork without any run
time cost to native Linux.


Powered by blists - more mailing lists