linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] ptrace: fix ptrace vs tasklist_lock race on PREEMPT

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: <87ee23zqdj.fsf@email.froward.int.ebiederm.org>
Date:   Mon, 11 Apr 2022 08:44:24 -0500
From:   "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>
To:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc:     Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
        Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Ben Segall <bsegall@...gle.com>,
        Daniel Bristot de Oliveira <bristot@...hat.com>,
        Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@....com>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@...hat.com>,
        Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>,
        Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] ptrace: fix ptrace vs tasklist_lock race on PREEMPT_RT.

Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> writes:

> On Fri, Apr 08, 2022 at 10:06:30PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>
>> I'll ponder if wait_task_inactive() can simplify things..
>
> This,.. so ptrace_check_attach(), which does ptrace_freeze_traced()
> already does wait_task_inactive(), but on the 'wrong' side of things.
>
> AFAICT, if we move that up, we're almost there, except that opens up a
> detach+attach race. That could be fixed by doing another
> wait_task_inactive(), but we can't due to locking :/
>
> Let's see if I can make that work without making a mess of things.
> Because ensuring the task is stuck in schedule() makes the whole
> saved_state thing go away -- as you noted.

The code can perhaps synchronize on a bit using the the full locking and
then drop the locks and call the wait_task_inactive or whatever.

The challenge as I see it is after the traced task is inactive to allow
"wake_up_state(t, TASK_WAKEKILL)" on the traced task, have the traced
tasks state change to TASK_RUNNING and not allow the traced task to run
until what is today ptrace_unfreeze_task is called.

I just don't know how to get something stuck and not allow it to run.

Eric