|
Message-ID: <93cbaeffbc860a145843e0380058c50e@ispras.ru> Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2020 12:27:44 +0300 From: Alexey Izbyshev <izbyshev@...ras.ru> To: musl@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Calling setxid() in a vfork()-child Hello, I'm investigating possibility of using vfork() instead of fork() in a Linux-only application. Before calling execve(), the app might need to call some functions to setup the child, including setxid() (let's assume that security concerns of [1] are not applicable). I'm aware that POSIX doesn't allow that for vfork()-children, but I'm also aware that it might be OK on Linux if the set of functions is sufficiently constrained, and that vfork() is used to efficiently implement posix_spawn() in C libraries. However, setuid()/setgid() seem particularly tricky because of the need to call the actual syscall in all threads, so if a C library is unaware that setxid() is called in a vfork()-child, it might attempt to interact with threads of the parent process, potentially causing trouble. I've checked musl and found a recent commit[2] that fixes this exact issue. I've also checked glibc[3], but haven't found any handling of this case (and vfork() doesn't appear to do anything special in this regard either[4]). Do I understand correctly that, from an application developer perspective, it's currently better to avoid setxid/setrlimit libc functions in a vfork()-child, and that using syscall() or avoiding vfork() entirely is preferred in this case? Thanks, Alexey [1] https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=14749 [2] https://git.musl-libc.org/cgit/musl/commit/?id=a5aff1972 [3] https://sourceware.org/git?p=glibc.git;a=blob;f=nptl/allocatestack.c;h=4b45f8c884b;hb=HEAD#l1082 [4] https://sourceware.org/git?p=glibc.git;a=blob;f=sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/x86_64/vfork.S;h=776d2fc61;hb=HEAD#l44
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.