From: NeilBrown <neilb-l3A5Bk7waGM@public.gmane.org>
To: "Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)"
<mtk.manpages-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>
Cc: Vasiliy Kulikov <segoon-cxoSlKxDwOJWk0Htik3J/w@public.gmane.org>,
KOSAKI Motohiro
<kosaki.motohiro-+CUm20s59erQFUHtdCDX3A@public.gmane.org>,
"linux-man-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org"
<linux-man-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org>,
lkml <linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org>
Subject: Re: Documenting execve() and EAGAIN
Date: Thu, 22 May 2014 11:41:02 +1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140522114102.66129305@notabene.brown> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <537CEC90.7060000-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3428 bytes --]
On Wed, 21 May 2014 20:12:32 +0200 "Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)"
<mtk.manpages-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote:
> Vasily (and Motohiro),
>
> Sometime ago, Motohiro raised a documentation bug
> ( https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=42704 ) which
> relates to your commit 72fa59970f8698023045ab0713d66f3f4f96945c
> ("move RLIMIT_NPROC check from set_user() to do_execve_common()")
>
> I have attempted to document this, and I would like to ask you
> (and Motohiro) if you would review the text proposed below for
> the exceve(2) man page.
>
> Thank you,
>
> Michael
>
>
> ERRORS
> EAGAIN (since Linux 3.1)
> Having changed its real UID using one of the set*uid()
> calls, the caller was—and is now still—above its
> RLIMIT_NPROC resource limit (see setrlimit(2)). For a
> more detailed explanation of this error, see NOTES.
>
> NOTES
> execve() and EAGAIN
> A more detailed explanation of the EAGAIN error that can occur
> (since Linux 3.1) when calling execve() is as follows.
>
> The EAGAIN error can occur when a preceding call to setuid(2),
> setreuid(2), or setresuid(2) caused the real user ID of the
> process to change, and that change caused the process to
> exceed its RLIMIT_NPROC resource limit (i.e., the number of
> processes belonging to the new real UID exceeds the resource
> limit). In Linux 3.0 and earlier, this caused the set*uid()
> call to fail.
I don't know how detailed/precise you want to be, but this failure was from
2.6.0 to 3.0.
Prior to 2.6, the limit was not imposed on processes that changed their uid.
http://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/history/history.git/commit/?id=909cc4ae86f3380152a18e2a3c44523893ee11c4
$ git describe --contains 909cc4ae86f3380152a18e2a3c44523893ee11c4
v2.6.0-test2~85^2~5^2~15
Otherwise the description fits my understanding.
NeilBrown
>
> Since Linux 3.1, the scenario just described no longer causes
> the set*uid() call to fail, because it too often led to secu‐
> rity holes because buggy applications didn't check the return
> status and assumed that—if the caller had root privileges—the
> call would always succeed. Instead, the set*uid() calls now
> successfully change real UID, but the kernel sets an internal
> flag, named PF_NPROC_EXCEEDED, to note that the RLIMIT_NPROC
> resource limit has been exceeded. If the resource limit is
> still exceeded at the time of a subsequent execve() call, that
> call fails with the error EAGAIN. This kernel logic ensures
> that the RLIMIT_NPROC resource limit is still enforced for the
> common privileged daemon workflow—namely, fork(2)+ set*uid()+
> execve(2).
>
> If the resource limit was not still exceeded at the time of
> the execve() call (because other processes belonging to this
> real UID terminated between the set*uid() call and the
> execve() call), then the execve() call succeeds and the kernel
> clears the PF_NPROC_EXCEEDED process flag. The flag is also
> cleared if a subsequent call to fork(2) by this process suc‐
> ceeds.
>
[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 828 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-05-22 1:41 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-05-21 18:12 Documenting execve() and EAGAIN Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)
[not found] ` <537CEC90.7060000-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>
2014-05-22 1:41 ` NeilBrown [this message]
[not found] ` <20140522114102.66129305-wvvUuzkyo1EYVZTmpyfIwg@public.gmane.org>
2014-05-22 13:28 ` Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)
2014-05-26 18:11 ` Vasiliy Kulikov
2014-05-27 5:51 ` Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)
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=20140522114102.66129305@notabene.brown \
--to=neilb-l3a5bk7wagm@public.gmane.org \
--cc=kosaki.motohiro-+CUm20s59erQFUHtdCDX3A@public.gmane.org \
--cc=linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org \
--cc=linux-man-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org \
--cc=mtk.manpages-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org \
--cc=segoon-cxoSlKxDwOJWk0Htik3J/w@public.gmane.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).