Devin Bayer <[email protected]> writes:
>
> I'm looking for comments, testing and inclusion in the next release.
> I have tested it in UML and one i686 build. The coredump files
> produced were valid.
I did a similar patch some time ago, but it allowed to execute a program
instead of allowing fifos with the core on stdin. IMHO that's a better
usage model because it doesn't require a daemon (and if you want one
you can use a trivial forwarder)
I didn't post it because it still needed some cleanup and
double checking of a few corner cases and ran out of time for that.
I agree it's very useful. In my case the idea was to do
automatic crash reporting. I wrote some simpleminded backup
scripts for that.
If there is interest I can dig it out. I think it was already
in better shape than your patch ;-)
> {
> - if (file->f_op->llseek) {
> + if (off == file->f_pos) + return 1;
> + if (file->f_op->llseek == no_llseek && off > file->f_pos) {
> + int nr = off - file->f_pos;
> + char zeros[nr];
> +
> + memset(zeros,0,nr);
> + return dump_write(file, zeros, nr);
That's a exploitable root hole and a likely crash I think.
> + if (do_truncate(file->f_dentry, 0) != 0)
> + goto close_fail;
> + }
> retval = binfmt->core_dump(signr, regs, file);
> + if(S_ISFIFO(inode->i_mode))
> + spin_unlock(&fifo_core_lock);
You're holding a spinlock over operations that can sleep like
write or truncate? That's totally wrong.
-Andi
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
