[lkml]   [2018]   [Nov]   [20]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH v1 2/2] signal: add procfd_signal() syscall
On Mon, Nov 19, 2018 at 1:21 PM, Christian Brauner <> wrote:
> That can be done without a loop by comparing the level counter for the
> two pid namespaces.
>> And you can rewrite pidns_get_parent to use it. So you would instead be
>> doing:
>> if (pidns_is_descendant(proc_pid_ns, task_active_pid_ns(current)))
>> return -EPERM;
>> (Or you can just copy the 5-line loop into procfd_signal -- though I
>> imagine we'll need this for all of the procfd_* APIs.)

Why is any of this even necessary? Why does the child namespace we're
considering even have a file descriptor to its ancestor's procfs? If
it has one of these FDs, it can already *read* all sorts of
information it really shouldn't be able to acquire, so the additional
ability to send a signal (subject to the usual permission checks)
feels like sticking a finger in a dike that's already well-perforated.
IMHO, we shouldn't bother with this check. The patch would be simpler
without it.

 \ /
  Last update: 2018-11-19 22:26    [W:0.091 / U:0.820 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site