|
Message-ID: <20110725234013.GB24110@openwall.com> Date: Tue, 26 Jul 2011 03:40:13 +0400 From: Solar Designer <solar@...nwall.com> To: Vasiliy Kulikov <segoon@...nwall.com> Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>, NeilBrown <neilb@...e.de>, Stephen Smalley <sds@...ho.nsa.gov>, kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com, James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...e.de>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, Jiri Slaby <jslaby@...e.cz>, Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>, Eric Paris <eparis@...hat.com>, Willy Tarreau <w@....eu>, Sebastian Krahmer <krahmer@...e.de> Subject: Re: [PATCH] move RLIMIT_NPROC check from set_user() to do_execve_common() Vasiliy, On Mon, Jul 25, 2011 at 09:14:23PM +0400, Vasiliy Kulikov wrote: > @@ -1433,6 +1433,19 @@ static int do_execve_common(const char *filename, > struct files_struct *displaced; > bool clear_in_exec; > int retval; > + const struct cred *cred = current_cred(); > + > + /* > + * We move the actual failure in case of RLIMIT_NPROC excess from > + * set*uid() to execve() because too many poorly written programs > + * don't check setuid() return code. Here we additionally recheck > + * whether NPROC limit is still exceeded. > + */ > + if ((current->flags & PF_NPROC_EXCEEDED) && > + atomic_read(&cred->user->processes) > rlimit(RLIMIT_NPROC)) { > + retval = -EAGAIN; > + goto out_ret; > + } Do you possibly need: current->flags &= ~PF_NPROC_EXCEEDED; somewhere after this point? I think it's weird to have past set_user() failure affect other than the very next execve(). Perhaps also reset the flag on fork() because we have an RLIMIT_NPROC check on fork() anyway. Thanks, Alexander
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.