On Tue, Jan 9, 2018 at 12:23 PM, Kees Cook <keescook@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Attempts to solve problems with the stack limit changing during exec > continue to be frustrated[1][2]. In addition to the specific issues > around the Stack Clash family of flaws, Andy Lutomirski pointed out[3] > other places during exec where the stack limit is used and is assumed > to be unchanging. Given the many places it gets used and the fact that > it can be manipulated/raced via setrlimit() and prlimit(), I think the > only way to handle this is to move away from the "current" view of the > stack limit and instead attach it to the bprm, and plumb this down into > the functions that need to know the stack limits. This series implements > the approach. I'd be curious to hear feedback on alternatives. Friendly ping -- looking for some people with spare cycles to look this over. If people want, I can toss it into -next as part of my kspp tree. It's been living happily in 0-day for 2 weeks... Thanks! -Kees > [1] 04e35f4495dd ("exec: avoid RLIMIT_STACK races with prlimit()") > [2] 779f4e1c6c7c ("Revert "exec: avoid RLIMIT_STACK races with prlimit()"") > [3] to security@xxxxxxxxxx, "Subject: existing rlimit races?" -- Kees Cook Pixel Security