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: <YLolc7z64h9yHNao@zn.tnic>
Date:   Fri, 4 Jun 2021 15:06:59 +0200
From:   Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
To:     "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>
Cc:     Jiashuo Liang <liangjs@....edu.cn>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
        Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, x86@...nel.org,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] signal/x86: Don't send SIGSEGV twice on SEGV_PKUERR

On Thu, Jun 03, 2021 at 04:31:46PM -0500, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> There are two ways signals get delivered.  The old fashioned way in the
> signal bitmap, and the new fangled way by queuing sigqueue_info.

By that you mean that third arg siginfo_t to

SYSCALL_DEFINE3(rt_sigqueueinfo, pid_t, pid, int, sig,
                siginfo_t __user *, uinfo)

I presume?

Which, as sigqueue(3) says, is what is called on Linux.

> In the old fashioned way there is no information except that the
> signal itself was delivered, and if the signal is sent twice it
> is impossible to find out. In the new fangled way because the
> sigqueue_info can vary between different times a signal is sent you
> can both see that a signal was delivered twice (because there are two
> distinct entries in the queue), but also possibly tell those two times
> a signal was sent apart.
>
> The new real time signals can queue as many sigqueue_info's as their
> rlimit allows.  The old signals are limited to exactly one sigqueue_info
> per signal number.

Aha.

> In this case the legacy_queue check tests to see if the signal is
> already pending (present in the signal bitmap) and not a new real time
> signal (which means only one sigqueue_info entry is allowed in the
> signal queue).

Aha, that sigismember() call in legacy_queue().

> Or in short I think everything turns out ok because the first signal is
> delivered, and the second just happens to get dropped as a duplicate by
> __send_signal.

Right, it is a SIGSEGV in both cases. So it is a legacy signal, and
that'll get marked in that sigset->sig array. Which is per task... ok.

> That is fragile and confusing to depend on so we should just fix the
> code to not send the wrong signal.

Yap.

> I hope that clears things up.

Very much so, thanks for taking the time!

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.

https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ