mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Roland McGrath <roland@redhat.com>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>, Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: [PATCH] fix PTRACE_ATTACH race with real parent's wait calls
Date: Fri, 24 Sep 2004 16:12:19 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <200409242312.i8ONCJ6w004680@magilla.sf.frob.com> (raw)

There is a race between PTRACE_ATTACH and the real parent calling wait.
For a moment, the task is put in PT_PTRACED but with its parent still
pointing to its real_parent.  In this circumstance, if the real parent
calls wait without the WUNTRACED flag, he can see a stopped child status,
which wait should never return without WUNTRACED when the caller is not
using ptrace.  Here it is not the caller that is using ptrace, but some
third party.

This patch avoids this race condition by only setting PT_PTRACED while
holding the tasklist_lock.

ptrace_attach used task_lock for this, and a comment in sched.h says that
it covers ->ptrace.  But in fact, no other users of ->ptrace use task_lock
for synchronization.  The places that clear ->ptrace all do so while
holding tasklist_lock for write.  That seems appropriate to me, as there
are encoded assumptions that ->ptrace and the parent links get updated
atomically.  Using tasklist_lock here makes the assumptions in the wait
code work right, so that the race window I described above can't happen.


Thanks,
Roland

Signed-off-by: Roland McGrath <roland@redhat.com>

Index: 2.6/kernel/ptrace.c
===================================================================
RCS file: /home/roland/redhat/bkcvs/linux-2.5/kernel/ptrace.c,v
retrieving revision 1.36
diff -B -b -p -u -r1.36 ptrace.c
--- 2.6/kernel/ptrace.c 23 Sep 2004 23:35:16 -0000 1.36
+++ 2.6/kernel/ptrace.c 24 Sep 2004 22:46:40 -0000
@@ -129,14 +129,22 @@ int ptrace_attach(struct task_struct *ta
 	retval = security_ptrace(current, task);
 	if (retval)
 		goto bad;
+	task_unlock(task);
+
+	retval = capable(CAP_SYS_PTRACE); /* Hold no locks while calling.  */
+
+	write_lock_irq(&tasklist_lock);
+
+	/* Re-check with tasklist_lock held. */
+	if (unlikely(task->ptrace & PT_PTRACED)) {
+		write_unlock_irq(&tasklist_lock);
+		return -EPERM;
+	}
 
 	/* Go */
 	task->ptrace |= PT_PTRACED;
-	if (capable(CAP_SYS_PTRACE))
+	if (retval)
 		task->ptrace |= PT_PTRACE_CAP;
-	task_unlock(task);
-
-	write_lock_irq(&tasklist_lock);
 	__ptrace_link(task, current);
 	write_unlock_irq(&tasklist_lock);
 



             reply	other threads:[~2004-09-24 23:12 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2004-09-24 23:12 Roland McGrath [this message]
2004-09-24 23:32 ` Chris Wright
2004-09-25  0:51   ` Roland McGrath
2004-09-25  1:39     ` Roland McGrath

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=200409242312.i8ONCJ6w004680@magilla.sf.frob.com \
    --to=roland@redhat.com \
    --cc=akpm@osdl.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=torvalds@osdl.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox

all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®