Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 23 Mar 2012 10:47:48 +0400 | From | Cyrill Gorcunov <> | Subject | Re: [patch 1/2] c/r: prctl: Add ability to set new mm_struct::exe_file |
| |
On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 10:41:36AM +0400, Cyrill Gorcunov wrote: > On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 04:38:43PM -0700, Eric W. Biederman wrote: > > > > > > Andrew, take a look please, will the changelog and comments look > > > better? > > > > Can you change this to take an actual address and get the exe_file > > from an mmapped area and make certain that the mmaped_area is already > > mapped MAP_EXEC. > > > > That will prevent out-right lies. > > > > At least then we will know that exe_file will at least be a file that is > > mapped executable in the process's address space. It's not a lot better > > but it makes /proc/<pid>/exe at almost as trustable as it is now. > > This won't work for all cases. When we restore a program we map new > VM_EXEC areas _without_ vma::vm_file field. >
Well, it's not complete true ;) At moment all exec areas we re-map during restore do correspond to executable files. but I think having ability to set this symlink without requirement such as 'every VM_EXEC should be mapped with file' is a win. That said I would prefer to leave this interface as is, until there strong objections.
Cyrill
| |