Re: [patch 0/4] MAP_NOZERO v2 - VM_NOZERO/MAP_NOZERO early summer madness

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]


On Mon, 2 Jul 2007, Andy Isaacson wrote:

> On Sat, Jun 30, 2007 at 12:03:07PM -0700, Davide Libenzi wrote:
> > I think the focus should be to find a case where under the currently 
> > implemented policy for MAP_NOZERO, MAP_NOZERO represent a loss of security 
> > WRT no MAP_NOZERO.   I have not been able to find one yet, although Andy 
> > found a potential one in the setuid+exec/ptrace race (fixed by a patch 
> > that should IMO go in in any case).
> BTW, the ptrace variant of this issue is not a problem -- PTRACE_ATTACH
> running as newuid gets EPERM when trying to attach at /* here */ below.
>     setuid(newuid);
>     /* here */
>     exec(...);
>     exit(1);
> sys_setuid sets current->mm->dumpable = suid_dumpable, so unless the
> admin asked for it, there is no risk WRT PTRACE_ATTACH.  However, this
> risk vector does need to be considered when implementing MAP_NOZERO.

Yes, I missed that. Ptrace is fine there. The 3 lines patch is still 
needed for MAP_NOZERO though.

- Davide

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

[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]
  Powered by Linux