From: John Stultz <john.stultz@linaro.org>
To: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Arjan van de Ven <arjan@linux.intel.com>,
lkml <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Oren Laadan <orenl@cellrox.com>,
Ruchi Kandoi <kandoiruchi@google.com>,
Rom Lemarchand <romlem@android.com>,
Android Kernel Team <kernel-team@android.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] proc: Add /proc/<pid>/timerslack_ns interface
Date: Wed, 17 Feb 2016 14:51:47 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CALAqxLV2hYUJV3My8r1Puqm=c00ic+gvmahrxDCQBeP4AW7J9A@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAGXu5jJCYhJE=-OkXt5gPQaicnNyWNsbRqfijDXi_JNZiuVVTQ@mail.gmail.com>
On Wed, Feb 17, 2016 at 2:45 PM, Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org> wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 17, 2016 at 2:29 PM, John Stultz <john.stultz@linaro.org> wrote:
>> On Wed, Feb 17, 2016 at 12:18 PM, Andrew Morton
>> <akpm@linux-foundation.org> wrote:
>>> On Wed, 17 Feb 2016 12:09:08 -0800 Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org> wrote:
>>>> On Wed, Feb 17, 2016 at 11:35 AM, Andrew Morton
>>>> > The procfs file's permissions are 0644, yes? So a process's
>>>> > timer_slack is world-readable? hm.
>>>>
>>>> This should be 600, IMO.
>>>
>>> Sounds safer.
>>
>> So I've gone ahead and addressed this and the other feedback you had.
>> But this bit made me realize that I may have missed a key aspect to
>> the interface that Android needs.
>>
>> In particular, the whole point here is to allow a controlling task to
>> modify other tasks' timerslack to limit background tasks' power usage
>> (and to modify them back to normal when the background tasks become
>> foreground tasks). Note that on android different tasks run as
>> different users.
>>
>> Currently, the controlling process has minimally elevated privileges
>> (CAP_SYS_NICE). The initial review suggested those privileges should
>> be higher (PTRACE_MODE_ATTACH), which I've implemented. However, I'm
>> realizing that by moving to the proc interface, the filesystem
>> permissions here put yet another barrier in the way.
>>
>> While the 600 permissions makes initial sense, it does limit these
>> controlling tasks with extra privileges (though not root) from
>> modifying the timerslack, since they cannot open the file to begin
>> with.
>>
>> So.... Does world writable (plus the PTRACE_MODE_ATTACH_FSCREDS check)
>> make more sense here? Or is there a better way for a system to tweak
>> the default permissions for procfs entries? (And if so, does that
>> render the PTRACE_MODE_ATTACH... check unnecessary?).
>>
>> Apologies. I'm fighting a head-cold, so I'm not feeling particularly sharp here.
>
> Is timerslack sensitive at all? You could add the ptrace test to the
> _show function too, maybe. Then 0666 would solve the open issue
> without leaking the timerslack.
I don't see how timerslack would be sensitive, but probably many
mistakes start out that way, so not being cavalier about it seems
wise. :)
Ok. Sounds like you and Andrew are on the same page wrt 666 +
PTRACE_MODE_ATTACH, and that seems like it would be workable.
I'll get that implemented here shortly.
Thanks so much again for the feedback! Really appreciate it!
-john
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-02-17 22:51 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 27+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-02-17 1:06 [PATCH 0/2] Extend timer_slack_ns to u64 on 32bit systems & add /proc/<pid>/timerslack_ns John Stultz
2016-02-17 1:06 ` [PATCH 1/2] timer: Convert timer_slack_ns from unsigned long to u64 John Stultz
2016-02-17 1:06 ` [PATCH 2/2] proc: Add /proc/<pid>/timerslack_ns interface John Stultz
2016-02-17 19:35 ` Andrew Morton
2016-02-17 20:09 ` Kees Cook
2016-02-17 20:18 ` Andrew Morton
2016-02-17 20:51 ` John Stultz
2016-02-17 21:07 ` Andrew Morton
2016-02-17 22:29 ` John Stultz
2016-02-17 22:45 ` Kees Cook
2016-02-17 22:51 ` John Stultz [this message]
2016-02-17 22:53 ` Andrew Morton
2016-02-17 20:49 ` John Stultz
2016-02-18 5:59 ` [PATCH] proc: /proc/<pid>/timerslack_ns permissions fixes John Stultz
2016-02-18 17:52 ` Kees Cook
2016-07-13 23:47 ` [PATCH 2/2] proc: Add /proc/<pid>/timerslack_ns interface John Stultz
2016-07-14 3:39 ` Kees Cook
2016-07-14 5:29 ` Arjan van de Ven
2016-07-14 12:48 ` Serge E. Hallyn
2016-07-14 13:42 ` Arjan van de Ven
2016-07-14 16:01 ` John Stultz
2016-07-14 16:09 ` John Stultz
2016-07-14 17:45 ` Kees Cook
2016-07-14 17:48 ` Arjan van de Ven
2016-07-14 17:49 ` Serge E. Hallyn
2016-07-14 17:56 ` Kees Cook
2016-07-14 20:21 ` Serge E. Hallyn
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='CALAqxLV2hYUJV3My8r1Puqm=c00ic+gvmahrxDCQBeP4AW7J9A@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=john.stultz@linaro.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=arjan@linux.intel.com \
--cc=kandoiruchi@google.com \
--cc=keescook@chromium.org \
--cc=kernel-team@android.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=orenl@cellrox.com \
--cc=romlem@android.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/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).