Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1460728
| From | Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | linux.kernel |
| Subject | Re: [PATCH] seccomp: Fix tracer exit notifications during fatal signals |
| Date | 2016-08-11 20:20 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <s52Ke-7mc-9@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink) |
| References | <s4Lgm-3pe-17@gated-at.bofh.it> <s4ZW1-5uM-13@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| Organization | linux.* mail to news gateway |
On Thu, Aug 11, 2016 at 8:12 AM, Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com> wrote: > On 08/10, Kees Cook wrote: >> >> This fixes a ptrace vs fatal pending signals bug as manifested in seccomp >> now that ptrace was reordered to happen after ptrace. The short version is >> that seccomp should not attempt to call do_exit() while fatal signals are >> pending under a tracer. This was needlessly paranoid. Instead, the syscall >> can just be skipped and normal signal handling, tracer notification, and >> process death can happen. > > ACK. > > I think this change is fine in any case, but... > >> The bug happens because when __seccomp_filter() detects >> fatal_signal_pending(), it calls do_exit() without dequeuing the fatal >> signal. When do_exit() sends the PTRACE_EVENT_EXIT > > I _never_ understood what PTRACE_EVENT_EXIT should actually do. I mean, > when it should actually stop. This was never defined. Yeah, agreed. I spent some time reading through what should happen to __TASK_TRACED during exit and my head spun. :) >> notification and >> that task is descheduled, __schedule() notices that there is a fatal >> signal pending and changes its state from TASK_TRACED to TASK_RUNNING. > > And this can happen anyway, with or without this change, with or without > seccomp. Because another fatal signal can be pending. So PTRACE_EVENT_EXIT > actually depends on /dev/random. > > Perhaps we should finally define what it should do. Say, it should only > stop if SIGKILL was sent "implicitely" by exit/exec. But as for exec, > there are more (off-topic) complications, not sure we actually want this... > > Nevermind, the main problem is that _any_ change in this area can break > something. This code is sooooooo old. > > But let me repeat, I think this change is fine anyway. > > Acked-by: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com> Awesome, thanks! -Kees -- Kees Cook Nexus Security
Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
[PATCH] seccomp: Fix tracer exit notifications during fatal signals Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org> - 2016-08-11 01:40 +0200
Re: [PATCH] seccomp: Fix tracer exit notifications during fatal signals Kyle Huey <me@kylehuey.com> - 2016-08-11 02:20 +0200
Re: [PATCH] seccomp: Fix tracer exit notifications during fatal signals Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net> - 2016-08-11 09:30 +0200
Re: [PATCH] seccomp: Fix tracer exit notifications during fatal signals Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org> - 2016-08-11 20:10 +0200
Re: [PATCH] seccomp: Fix tracer exit notifications during fatal signals Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com> - 2016-08-11 17:20 +0200
Re: [PATCH] seccomp: Fix tracer exit notifications during fatal signals Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org> - 2016-08-11 20:20 +0200
Re: [PATCH] seccomp: Fix tracer exit notifications during fatal signals Kyle Huey <me@kylehuey.com> - 2016-08-23 05:30 +0200
Re: [PATCH] seccomp: Fix tracer exit notifications during fatal signals Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org> - 2016-08-23 22:00 +0200
Re: [PATCH] seccomp: Fix tracer exit notifications during fatal signals "Robert O'Callahan" <robert@ocallahan.org> - 2016-08-12 05:30 +0200
csiph-web