Received-SPF: softfail (google.com: domain of transitioning linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org does not designate 23.128.96.19 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.19;
Date:   Thu, 17 Mar 2022 12:10:16 -0700
From:   Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
To:     "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>
Cc:     linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
        Alexey Gladkov <legion@kernel.org>,
        Kyle Huey <me@kylehuey.com>, Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>,
        Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>, linux-api@vger.kernel.org,
        Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] ptrace: Move setting/clearing ptrace_message into
 ptrace_stop
Message-ID: <202203171209.FC87C7B08@keescook>
References: <87a6ha4zsd.fsf@email.froward.int.ebiederm.org>
 <87bl1kunjj.fsf@email.froward.int.ebiederm.org>
 <87r19opkx1.fsf_-_@email.froward.int.ebiederm.org>
 <87o82gdlu9.fsf_-_@email.froward.int.ebiederm.org>
 <87tubyx0rg.fsf_-_@email.froward.int.ebiederm.org>
 <87bky67qfv.fsf_-_@email.froward.int.ebiederm.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <87bky67qfv.fsf_-_@email.froward.int.ebiederm.org>
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, Mar 15, 2022 at 06:21:08PM -0500, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> 
> Today ptrace_message is easy to overlook as it not a core part of
> ptrace_stop.  It has been overlooked so much that there are places
> that set ptrace_message and don't clear it, and places that never set
> it.  So if you get an unlucky sequence of events the ptracer may be
> able to read a ptrace_message that does not apply to the current
> ptrace stop.
> 
> Move setting of ptrace_message into ptrace_stop so that it always gets
> set before the stop, and always gets cleared after the stop.  This
> prevents non-sense from being reported to userspace and makes
> ptrace_message more visible in the ptrace helper functions so that
> kernel developers can see it.
> 
> Signed-off-by: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>

This looks good to me. Did you happen to run the seccomp selftests
before/after these changes?

Reviewed-by: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>

-- 
Kees Cook