Bernd Edlinger [off-list ref] writes:
This removes the last users of cred_guard_mutex
and replaces it with a new mutex exec_guard_mutex,
and a boolean unsafe_execve_in_progress.
This addresses the case when at least one of the
sibling threads is traced, and therefore the trace
process may dead-lock in ptrace_attach, but de_thread
will need to wait for the tracer to continue execution.
The solution is to detect this situation and make
ptrace_attach and similar functions return -EAGAIN,
but only in a situation where a dead-lock is imminent.
This means this is an API change, but only when the
process is traced while execve happens in a
multi-threaded application.
See tools/testing/selftests/ptrace/vmaccess.c
for a test case that gets fixed by this change.
Hmm. The logic with unsafe_execve_in_progress is interesting.
I think I see what you are aiming for.
So far as you have hit what you are aiming for I think this is
a safe change as the only cases that will change are the cases
that would deadlock today.
At a minimum the code is subtle and I don't see big fat
warning comments that subtle code needs to keep people
from using it wrong.
Further while the change below to proc_pid_attr_write looks
like it is being treated the same as ptrace_attach. When in
fact proc_pid_attr_write needs the no_new_privs and ptrace_attach
protection the same as exec. As the updated cred won't be used in an
ongoing exec, exec does not need protection from proc_pid_attr_write,
other than deadlock protection.
Having the relevant lock be per task_struct lock would probably be a
better way to avoid deadlock with a concurrent proc_pid_attr_write.
So I am going to pass on these last two patches for now, and apply the
rest and get them into linux-next.
Eric
quoted hunk
diff --git a/fs/proc/base.c b/fs/proc/base.c
index 6b13fc4..a428536 100644
--- a/fs/proc/base.c
+++ b/fs/proc/base.c
@@ -2680,14 +2680,17 @@ static ssize_t proc_pid_attr_write(struct file * file, const char __user * buf,
}
/* Guard against adverse ptrace interaction */
- rv = mutex_lock_interruptible(¤t->signal->cred_guard_mutex);
+ rv = mutex_lock_interruptible(¤t->signal->exec_guard_mutex);
if (rv < 0)
goto out_free;
- rv = security_setprocattr(PROC_I(inode)->op.lsm,
- file->f_path.dentry->d_name.name, page,
- count);
- mutex_unlock(¤t->signal->cred_guard_mutex);
+ if (unlikely(current->signal->unsafe_execve_in_progress))
+ rv = -EAGAIN;
+ else
+ rv = security_setprocattr(PROC_I(inode)->op.lsm,
+ file->f_path.dentry->d_name.name,
+ page, count);
+ mutex_unlock(¤t->signal->exec_guard_mutex);
out_free:
kfree(page);
out: