From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754229Ab1LLVtr (ORCPT ); Mon, 12 Dec 2011 16:49:47 -0500 Received: from mail-qy0-f174.google.com ([209.85.216.174]:61098 "EHLO mail-qy0-f174.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754002Ab1LLVtp (ORCPT ); Mon, 12 Dec 2011 16:49:45 -0500 Message-ID: <4EE676F2.1020204@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2011 16:49:38 -0500 From: KOSAKI Motohiro User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.7; rv:8.0) Gecko/20111105 Thunderbird/8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Cyrill Gorcunov CC: LKML , Tejun Heo , Andrew Morton , Andrew Vagin , Serge Hallyn , Vasiliy Kulikov , Kees Cook , KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki , Alexey Dobriyan , "Eric W. Biederman" , Pavel Emelyanov , Michael Kerrisk Subject: Re: [patch 3/3] [PATCH] prctl: Add PR_SET_MM codes to set up mm_struct entires v3 References: <20111212200642.836001668@openvz.org> <20111212201715.244414996@openvz.org> In-Reply-To: <20111212201715.244414996@openvz.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-2022-JP Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi > When we restore a task we need to set up text, data and data > heap sizes from userspace to the values a task had at > checkpoint time. This patch adds auxilary prctl codes for that. > > While most of them have a statistical nature (their values > are involved into calculation of /proc//statm output) > the start_brk and brk values are used to compute an allowed > size of program data segment expansion. Which means an arbitrary > changes of this values might be dangerous operation. So to restrict > access the following requirements applied to prctl calls: > > - The process has to have CAP_SYS_ADMIN capability granted. This is very dangerous feature and useless from regular admins. Moreover, CAP_SYS_ADMIN has a pretty overweight meanings and we can't disable it on practical. So, I have a question. Why don't you make new capability for checkpoint?