lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2008]   [Mar]   [19]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH] signals: check_kill_permission: check session under tasklist_lock
Quoting Oleg Nesterov (oleg@tv-sign.ru):
> (on top of signals-cleanup-security_task_kill-usage-implementation.patch)
>
> This wasn't documented, but as Atsushi Tsuji <a-tsuji@bk.jp.nec.com> pointed
> out check_kill_permission() needs tasklist_lock for task_session_nr().
> I missed this fact when removed tasklist from the callers.
>
> Change check_kill_permission() to take tasklist_lock for the SIGCONT case.
> Re-order security checks so that we take tasklist_lock only if/when it is
> actually needed. This is a minimal fix for now, tasklist will be removed
> later.
>
> Also change the code to use task_session() instead of task_session_nr().
>
> Also, remove the SIGCONT check from cap_task_kill(), it is bogus (and the
> whole function is bogus. Serge, Eric, why it is still alive?).
>
> Signed-off-by: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@tv-sign.ru>
>
> --- 25/kernel/signal.c~CKP_TAKE_TASKLIST 2008-03-18 14:47:00.000000000 +0300
> +++ 25/kernel/signal.c 2008-03-18 17:25:19.000000000 +0300
> @@ -533,6 +533,7 @@ static int rm_from_queue(unsigned long m
> static int check_kill_permission(int sig, struct siginfo *info,
> struct task_struct *t)
> {
> + struct pid *sid;
> int error;
>
> if (!valid_signal(sig))
> @@ -545,11 +546,24 @@ static int check_kill_permission(int sig
> if (error)
> return error;
>
> - if (((sig != SIGCONT) || (task_session_nr(current) != task_session_nr(t)))
> - && (current->euid ^ t->suid) && (current->euid ^ t->uid)
> - && (current->uid ^ t->suid) && (current->uid ^ t->uid)
> - && !capable(CAP_KILL))
> - return -EPERM;
> + if ((current->euid ^ t->suid) && (current->euid ^ t->uid) &&
> + (current->uid ^ t->suid) && (current->uid ^ t->uid) &&
> + !capable(CAP_KILL)) {
> + switch (sig) {
> + case SIGCONT:
> + read_lock(&tasklist_lock);
> + sid = task_session(t);
> + read_unlock(&tasklist_lock);
> + /*
> + * We don't return the error if sid == NULL. The
> + * task was unhashed, the caller must notice this.
> + */
> + if (!sid || sid == task_session(current))
> + break;

Nice, in addition to a bugfix this is also far more readable.

> + default:
> + return -EPERM;
> + }
> + }
>
> return security_task_kill(t, info, sig, 0);
> }
> --- 25/security/commoncap.c~CKP_TAKE_TASKLIST 2008-03-18 17:07:02.000000000 +0300
> +++ 25/security/commoncap.c 2008-03-18 17:21:10.000000000 +0300
> @@ -552,10 +552,6 @@ int cap_task_kill(struct task_struct *p,
> if (p->uid == current->uid)
> return 0;
>
> - /* sigcont is permitted within same session */
> - if (sig == SIGCONT && (task_session_nr(current) == task_session_nr(p)))
> - return 0;
> -
> if (secid)
> /*
> * Signal sent as a particular user.

Note that cap_task_kill() should be gone anyway. What tree were you
basing this on?

thanks,
-serge


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2008-03-20 00:39    [from the cache]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans