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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <20230807-schnupfen-pechschwarz-5d81026b1c4a@brauner> Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2023 10:40:35 +0200 From: Christian Brauner <brauner@...nel.org> To: David Rheinsberg <david@...dahead.eu> Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, Alexander Mikhalitsyn <alexander@...alicyn.com>, "David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@...gle.com>, Luca Boccassi <bluca@...ian.org>, Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH] net/unix: use consistent error code in SO_PEERPIDFD On Mon, Aug 07, 2023 at 10:12:25AM +0200, David Rheinsberg wrote: > Change the new (unreleased) SO_PEERPIDFD sockopt to return ENODATA > rather than ESRCH if a socket type does not support remote peer-PID > queries. > > Currently, SO_PEERPIDFD returns ESRCH when the socket in question is > not an AF_UNIX socket. This is quite unexpected, given that one would > assume ESRCH means the peer process already exited and thus cannot be > found. However, in that case the sockopt actually returns EINVAL (via > pidfd_prepare()). This is rather inconsistent with other syscalls, which > usually return ESRCH if a given PID refers to a non-existant process. > > This changes SO_PEERPIDFD to return ENODATA instead. This is also what > SO_PEERGROUPS returns, and thus keeps a consistent behavior across > sockopts. > > Note that this code is returned in 2 cases: First, if the socket type is > not AF_UNIX, and secondly if the socket was not yet connected. In both > cases ENODATA seems suitable. > > Signed-off-by: David Rheinsberg <david@...dahead.eu> > --- > Hi! > > The SO_PEERPIDFD sockopt has been queued for 6.5, so hopefully we can > get that in before the release? Shouldn't be an issue afaict. Looks good to me, Reviewed-by: Christian Brauner <brauner@...nel.org>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists