WARN_ON(!task->ptrace || task->parent != current);
+ /*
+ * PTRACE_LISTEN can allow ptrace_trap_notify to wake us up remotely.
+ * Recheck state under the lock to close this race.
+ */
spin_lock_irq(&task->sighand->siglock);
- if (__fatal_signal_pending(task))
- wake_up_state(task, __TASK_TRACED);
- else
- task->state = TASK_TRACED;
+ if (task->state == __TASK_TRACED) {
+ if (__fatal_signal_pending(task))
+ wake_up_state(task, __TASK_TRACED);
+ else
+ task->state = TASK_TRACED;
+ }
spin_unlock_irq(&task->sighand->siglock);
}
static int __ptrace_may_access(struct task_struct *task, unsigned int mode)
{
const struct cred *cred = current_cred(), *tcred;
+ int dumpable = 0;
+ kuid_t caller_uid;
+ kgid_t caller_gid;
+
+ if (!(mode & PTRACE_MODE_FSCREDS) == !(mode & PTRACE_MODE_REALCREDS)) {
+ WARN(1, "denying ptrace access check without PTRACE_MODE_*CREDS\n");
+ return -EPERM;
+ }
/* May we inspect the given task?
* This check is used both for attaching with ptrace
* because setting up the necessary parent/child relationship
* or halting the specified task is impossible.
*/
- int dumpable = 0;
+
/* Don't let security modules deny introspection */
- if (task == current)
+ if (same_thread_group(task, current))
return 0;
rcu_read_lock();
+ if (mode & PTRACE_MODE_FSCREDS) {
+ caller_uid = cred->fsuid;
+ caller_gid = cred->fsgid;
+ } else {
+ /*
+ * Using the euid would make more sense here, but something
+ * in userland might rely on the old behavior, and this
+ * shouldn't be a security problem since
+ * PTRACE_MODE_REALCREDS implies that the caller explicitly
+ * used a syscall that requests access to another process
+ * (and not a filesystem syscall to procfs).
+ */
+ caller_uid = cred->uid;
+ caller_gid = cred->gid;
+ }
tcred = __task_cred(task);
- if (uid_eq(cred->uid, tcred->euid) &&
- uid_eq(cred->uid, tcred->suid) &&
- uid_eq(cred->uid, tcred->uid) &&
- gid_eq(cred->gid, tcred->egid) &&
- gid_eq(cred->gid, tcred->sgid) &&
- gid_eq(cred->gid, tcred->gid))
+ if (uid_eq(caller_uid, tcred->euid) &&
+ uid_eq(caller_uid, tcred->suid) &&
+ uid_eq(caller_uid, tcred->uid) &&
+ gid_eq(caller_gid, tcred->egid) &&
+ gid_eq(caller_gid, tcred->sgid) &&
+ gid_eq(caller_gid, tcred->gid))
goto ok;
if (ptrace_has_cap(tcred->user_ns, mode))
goto ok;
if (task->mm)
dumpable = get_dumpable(task->mm);
rcu_read_lock();
- if (!dumpable && !ptrace_has_cap(__task_cred(task)->user_ns, mode)) {
+ if (dumpable != SUID_DUMP_USER &&
+ !ptrace_has_cap(__task_cred(task)->user_ns, mode)) {
rcu_read_unlock();
return -EPERM;
}
goto out;
task_lock(task);
- retval = __ptrace_may_access(task, PTRACE_MODE_ATTACH);
+ retval = __ptrace_may_access(task, PTRACE_MODE_ATTACH_REALCREDS);
task_unlock(task);
if (retval)
goto unlock_creds;
static int ptrace_resume(struct task_struct *child, long request,
unsigned long data)
{
+ bool need_siglock;
+
if (!valid_signal(data))
return -EIO;
user_disable_single_step(child);
}
+ /*
+ * Change ->exit_code and ->state under siglock to avoid the race
+ * with wait_task_stopped() in between; a non-zero ->exit_code will
+ * wrongly look like another report from tracee.
+ *
+ * Note that we need siglock even if ->exit_code == data and/or this
+ * status was not reported yet, the new status must not be cleared by
+ * wait_task_stopped() after resume.
+ *
+ * If data == 0 we do not care if wait_task_stopped() reports the old
+ * status and clears the code too; this can't race with the tracee, it
+ * takes siglock after resume.
+ */
+ need_siglock = data && !thread_group_empty(current);
+ if (need_siglock)
+ spin_lock_irq(&child->sighand->siglock);
child->exit_code = data;
wake_up_state(child, __TASK_TRACED);
+ if (need_siglock)
+ spin_unlock_irq(&child->sighand->siglock);
return 0;
}