Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 22 Jun 2010 15:25:36 +0300 | From | Dmitry Kasatkin <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] security: Yama LSM |
| |
Hi,
What is YAMA? Where is the tree?
Thanks, Dmitry
On 22/06/10 04:14, ext Kees Cook wrote: > Hi Tetsuo, > > On Tue, Jun 22, 2010 at 09:28:37AM +0900, Tetsuo Handa wrote: > >> Kees Cook wrote: >> >>> + /* require ptrace target be a child of ptracer on attach */ >>> + if (mode == PTRACE_MODE_ATTACH && ptrace_scope && >>> + !capable(CAP_SYS_PTRACE)) { >>> + struct task_struct *walker = child; >>> + >>> + read_lock(&tasklist_lock); >>> >> Holding tasklist_lock does not imply rcu protection. >> Don't you need rcu_read_lock() like setpriority() and getppid()? >> > You're totally right, thanks for the catch! Looks like setpriority() does > a similar kind of thing, so I've wrapped the whole thing in rcu_ now: > > ... > + rcu_read_lock(); > read_lock(&tasklist_lock); > while (walker->pid > 0) { > ... > rc = -EPERM; > read_unlock(&tasklist_lock); > + rcu_read_unlock(); > ... > > > -Kees > >
| |