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:   Fri, 08 Dec 2023 14:15:58 +0100
From:   Florian Weimer <fweimer@...hat.com>
To:     Christian Brauner <brauner@...nel.org>
Cc:     Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>,
        Tycho Andersen <tycho@...ho.pizza>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-api@...r.kernel.org,
        Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
        Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>
Subject: Re: [RFC 1/3] pidfd: allow pidfd_open() on non-thread-group leaders

* Christian Brauner:

> File descriptors are reachable for all processes/threads that share a
> file descriptor table. Changing that means breaking core userspace
> assumptions about how file descriptors work. That's not going to happen
> as far as I'm concerned.

It already has happened, though?  Threads are free to call
unshare(CLONE_FILES).  I'm sure that we have applications out there that
expect this to work.  At this point, the question is about whether we
want to acknowledge this possibility at the libc level or not.

Thanks,
Florian

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ