linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH RESEND2] ptrace: make ptrace() fail if the tracee changed its pid unexpectedly

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]

Date:   Tue, 11 May 2021 20:06:28 +0200
From:   Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
To:     Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:     Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
        Eugene Syromiatnikov <esyr@...hat.com>,
        Jan Kratochvil <jan.kratochvil@...hat.com>,
        Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>,
        Michael Kerrisk <mtk.manpages@...il.com>,
        Pedro Alves <palves@...hat.com>,
        Simon Marchi <simon.marchi@...icios.com>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RESEND2] ptrace: make ptrace() fail if the tracee changed
 its pid unexpectedly

On 05/11, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
>
> On 05/11, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
> > That said, why this:
> >
> > > +       rcu_read_lock();
> > > +       pid = task_pid_nr_ns(task, task_active_pid_ns(task->parent));
> > > +       rcu_read_unlock();
> >
> > I don't see why the RCU read lock would be needed? task_pid_nr_ns()
> > does any required locking itself, afaik.
> >
> > And even if it wasn't, this all happens with siglock held, can
> > anything actually change.
>
> ... and with tasklist_lock held.
>
> Hmm. Linus, I am shy to admit I can't answer immediately, I'll recheck
> tomorrow after sleep. But it seems you are right.

most probably to protect task->parent, not sure, this was 6 month ago...
but in this case we can use "current". I'll recheck.

> Thanks!

Oleg.