[PATCH v8 9/9] seccomp: implement SECCOMP_FILTER_FLAG_TSYNC
From: oleg@redhat.com (Oleg Nesterov)
Date: 2014-06-25 18:21:56
Also in:
linux-api, linux-arch, linux-mips, lkml
From: oleg@redhat.com (Oleg Nesterov)
Date: 2014-06-25 18:21:56
Also in:
linux-api, linux-arch, linux-mips, lkml
On 06/25, Kees Cook wrote:
On Wed, Jun 25, 2014 at 10:24 AM, Oleg Nesterov [off-list ref] wrote:quoted
However, do_execve() takes cred_guard_mutex at the start in prepare_bprm_creds() and drops it in install_exec_creds(), so it should solve the problem?I can't tell yet. I'm still trying to understand the order of operations here. It looks like de_thread() takes the sighand lock. do_execve_common does: prepare_bprm_creds (takes cred_guard_mutex) check_unsafe_exec (checks nnp to set LSM_UNSAFE_NO_NEW_PRIVS) prepare_binprm (handles suid escalation, checks nnp separately) security_bprm_set_creds (checks LSM_UNSAFE_NO_NEW_PRIVS) exec_binprm load_elf_binary flush_old_exec de_thread (takes and releases sighand->lock) install_exec_creds (releases cred_guard_mutex)
Yes, and note that when cred_guard_mutex is dropped all other threads are already killed,
I don't see a way to use cred_guard_mutex during tsync (which holds sighand->lock) without dead-locking. What were you considering here?
Just take/drop current->signal->cred_guard_mutex along with ->siglock in seccomp_set_mode_filter() ? Unconditionally on depending on SECCOMP_FILTER_FLAG_TSYNC. Oleg.