[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20110705141301.0d3594e0.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Date: Tue, 5 Jul 2011 14:13:01 -0700
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Vasiliy Kulikov <segoon@...nwall.com>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, viro@...iv.linux.org.uk,
rientjes@...gle.com, wilsons@...rt.ca, security@...nel.org,
kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] proc: fix a race in do_io_accounting()
<wakes up>
On Tue, 5 Jul 2011 00:13:39 +0400
Vasiliy Kulikov <segoon@...nwall.com> wrote:
> There is a ptrace_may_access() check in do_io_accounting() to prevent
> gathering information of setuid'ed and similar binaries. However, there
> is a race against execve(). Holding task->signal->cred_guard_mutex
> while gathering the information should protect against the race.
>
> The order of locking is similar to the one inside of
> ptrace_attach(): first goes cred_guard_mutex, then lock_task_sighand().
>
> v2 - use mutex_lock_killable() instead of mutex_lock().
>
> Signed-off-by: Vasiliy Kulikov <segoon@...nwall.com>
> Cc: stable@...nel.org
If a patch is to be backported into -stable then its changelog had
better explain why such a thing is needed. This one doesn't.
Please provide a full description of the conseuqences of the bug. One
which will permit the -stable maintainers to understand why they're
merging the patch, and one which will help distribution maintainers
decide whether they want to merge it as well.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
