linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/2] pid: add pidfd

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: <20190515145105.t7u6v5wxsq2tnbwj@yavin>
Date:   Thu, 16 May 2019 00:51:05 +1000
From:   Aleksa Sarai <cyphar@...har.com>
To:     Christian Brauner <christian@...uner.io>
Cc:     Yann Droneaud <ydroneaud@...eya.com>, jannh@...gle.com,
        oleg@...hat.com, viro@...iv.linux.org.uk,
        torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        arnd@...db.de, dhowells@...hat.com, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
        ebiederm@...ssion.com, elena.reshetova@...el.com,
        keescook@...omium.org, luto@...capital.net, luto@...nel.org,
        tglx@...utronix.de, linux-alpha@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-ia64@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-m68k@...ts.linux-m68k.org, linux-mips@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-parisc@...r.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org,
        linux-s390@...r.kernel.org, linux-sh@...r.kernel.org,
        sparclinux@...r.kernel.org, linux-xtensa@...ux-xtensa.org,
        linux-api@...r.kernel.org, linux-arch@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] pid: add pidfd_open()

On 2019-05-15, Christian Brauner <christian@...uner.io> wrote:
> On Wed, May 15, 2019 at 04:00:20PM +0200, Yann Droneaud wrote:
> > Would it be possible to create file descriptor with "restricted"
> > operation ?
> > 
> > - O_RDONLY: waiting for process completion allowed (for example)
> > - O_WRONLY: sending process signal allowed
> 
> Yes, something like this is likely going to be possible in the future.
> We had discussion around this. But mapping this to O_RDONLY and O_WRONLY
> is not the right model. It makes more sense to have specialized flags
> that restrict actions.

Not to mention that the O_* flags have silly values which we shouldn't
replicate in new syscalls IMHO.

-- 
Aleksa Sarai
Senior Software Engineer (Containers)
SUSE Linux GmbH
<https://www.cyphar.com/>

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (834 bytes)