From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 8845 invoked by alias); 8 Mar 2012 16:46:40 -0000 Received: (qmail 8835 invoked by uid 22791); 8 Mar 2012 16:46:39 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.7 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,SPF_HELO_PASS,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Thu, 08 Mar 2012 16:46:26 +0000 Received: from int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.23]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id q28GkQ27031580 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK) for ; Thu, 8 Mar 2012 11:46:26 -0500 Received: from host2.jankratochvil.net (ovpn-116-19.ams2.redhat.com [10.36.116.19]) by int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id q28GkMqA022212 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Thu, 8 Mar 2012 11:46:25 -0500 Date: Thu, 08 Mar 2012 16:46:00 -0000 From: Jan Kratochvil To: Tom Tromey Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [suspend] [patch 3/3] attach-fail-reasons: SELinux deny_ptrace Message-ID: <20120308164622.GA29697@host2.jankratochvil.net> References: <20120306061739.GC24004@host2.jankratochvil.net> <20120308065319.GA15742@host2.jankratochvil.net> <87d38nnivc.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <87d38nnivc.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2012-03/txt/msg00273.txt.bz2 On Thu, 08 Mar 2012 17:43:35 +0100, Tom Tromey wrote: > I wonder whether ptrace-hardening approaches other than SELinux still > have restrictions on PTRACE_TRACEME. If so then you may want a similar > patch anyhow. There is a note that YAMA does not restrict PTRACE_TRACEME, like I recommended for SELinux 'deny_ptrace': https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=786878#c17 While it is good to handle errors from system calls I am not sure it is worth to complicate GDB this way for a case which does not happen in real world. Regards, Jan