Re: [PATCH 1/4] signals: SEND_SIG_NOINFO should be considered as SI_FROMUSER()

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

 



On 10/04, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
>
> No changes in compiled code. The patch adds the new helper, si_fromuser()
> and changes check_kill_permission() to use this helper.
>
> The real effect of this patch is that from now we "officially" consider
> SEND_SIG_NOINFO signal as "from user-space" signals. This is already true
> if we look at the code which uses SEND_SIG_NOINFO, except __send_signal()
> has another opinion - see the next patch.
>
> The naming of these special SEND_SIG_XXX siginfo's is really bad imho.
> From __send_signal()'s pov they mean
>
> 	SEND_SIG_NOINFO		from user

To clarify, "from user" for SEND_SIG_NOINFO/SI_USER mean: sent by kernel
on behalf of some process. We should check permissions, sub-namespace,
we should fill si_pid/uid, etc.

Oleg.

_______________________________________________
Containers mailing list
Containers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers

[Index of Archives]     [Cgroups]     [Netdev]     [Linux Wireless]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Security]     [Linux for Hams]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite Forum]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux Admin]     [Samba]

  Powered by Linux