linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 9/9] ptrace: Don't change _

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: <87czh2160k.fsf@email.froward.int.ebiederm.org>
Date:   Wed, 27 Apr 2022 18:05:47 -0500
From:   "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>
To:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     rjw@...ysocki.net, Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
        mingo@...nel.org, vincent.guittot@...aro.org,
        dietmar.eggemann@....com, rostedt@...dmis.org, mgorman@...e.de,
        bigeasy@...utronix.de, Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
        tj@...nel.org, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Richard Weinberger <richard@....at>,
        Anton Ivanov <anton.ivanov@...bridgegreys.com>,
        Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net>,
        linux-um@...ts.infradead.org, Chris Zankel <chris@...kel.net>,
        Max Filippov <jcmvbkbc@...il.com>,
        inux-xtensa@...ux-xtensa.org, Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
        Jann Horn <jannh@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 9/9] ptrace: Don't change __state

"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com> writes:

> diff --git a/include/linux/sched/signal.h b/include/linux/sched/signal.h
> index 3c8b34876744..1947c85aa9d9 100644
> --- a/include/linux/sched/signal.h
> +++ b/include/linux/sched/signal.h
> @@ -437,7 +437,8 @@ extern void signal_wake_up_state(struct task_struct *t, unsigned int state);
>  
>  static inline void signal_wake_up(struct task_struct *t, bool resume)
>  {
> -	signal_wake_up_state(t, resume ? TASK_WAKEKILL : 0);
> +	bool wakekill = resume && !(t->jobctl & JOBCTL_DELAY_WAKEKILL);
> +	signal_wake_up_state(t, wakekill ? TASK_WAKEKILL : 0);
>  }
>  static inline void ptrace_signal_wake_up(struct task_struct *t, bool resume)
>  {

Grrr.  While looking through everything today I have realized that there
is a bug.

Suppose we have 3 processes: TRACER, TRACEE, KILLER.

Meanwhile TRACEE is in the middle of ptrace_stop, just after siglock has
been dropped.

The TRACER process has performed ptrace_attach on TRACEE and is in the
middle of a ptrace operation and has just set JOBCTL_DELAY_WAKEKILL.

Then comes in the KILLER process and sends the TRACEE a SIGKILL.
The TRACEE __state remains TASK_TRACED, as designed.

The bug appears when the TRACEE makes it to schedule().  Inside
schedule there is a call to signal_pending_state() which notices
a SIGKILL is pending and refuses to sleep.

I could avoid setting TIF_SIGPENDING in signal_wake_up but that
is insufficient as another signal may be pending.

I could avoid marking the task as __fatal_signal_pending but then
where would the information that the task needs to become
__fatal_signal_pending go.

Hmm.

This looks like I need my other pending cleanup which introduces a
helper to get this idea to work.

Eric