[lkml]   [2009]   [Apr]   [29]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
Patch in this message
Subject[PATCH] do_wait: do take security_task_wait() into account
I was never able to understand what should we actually do when
security_task_wait() fails, but the current code doesn't look right.

If ->task_wait() returns the error, we update *notask_error correctly.
But then we either reap the child (despite the fact this was forbidden)
or clear *notask_error (and hide the securiy policy problems).

This patch assumes that "stolen by ptrace" doesn't matter. If selinux
denies the child we should ignore it but make sure we report -EACCESS
instead of -ECHLD if there are no other eligible children.

Signed-off-by: Oleg Nesterov <>

--- PTRACE/kernel/exit.c~WAIT_SECURITY 2009-04-29 12:46:15.000000000 +0200
+++ PTRACE/kernel/exit.c 2009-04-29 16:19:40.000000000 +0200
@@ -1476,6 +1476,7 @@ static int wait_consider_task(struct tas
if (*notask_error)
*notask_error = ret;
+ return 0;

if (likely(!ptrace) && unlikely(task_ptrace(p))) {

 \ /
  Last update: 2009-04-29 18:09    [W:0.329 / U:1.988 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site