On 06/06, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>
> Oleg Nesterov writes:
>
> > However the patch looks fine to me, just the word "buggy" looks a bit
> > too strong imo.
>
> I guess I am in general agreement. Perhaps I can just say they values
> are wrong by definition?
Up to you. I won't really argue with "
Oleg Nesterov writes:
> On 05/18, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>>
>> The code in ptrace_signal to populate siginfo if the signal number
>> changed is buggy. If the tracer contined the tracee using
>> ptrace_detach it is guaranteed to use the real_parent (or possibly a
>> new tracer) but definitely n
On 05/18, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>
> The code in ptrace_signal to populate siginfo if the signal number
> changed is buggy. If the tracer contined the tracee using
> ptrace_detach it is guaranteed to use the real_parent (or possibly a
> new tracer) but definitely not the origional tracer to popu
The code in ptrace_signal to populate siginfo if the signal number
changed is buggy. If the tracer contined the tracee using
ptrace_detach it is guaranteed to use the real_parent (or possibly a
new tracer) but definitely not the origional tracer to populate si_pid
and si_uid.
Fix this bug by only
