Yes, this is exactly what I am saying. A process can change its own name using prctl or /proc/self/comm. prctl is protected by security_task_prctl, whereas /proc/self/comm is not protected by this LSM hook.
A system admin may expect to use security_task_prctl to block all attempt to change process name, however, it can still change name using /proc/self/comm. > On Sep 25, 2018, at 2:39 PM, Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcu...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Tue, Sep 25, 2018 at 01:27:08PM -0400, Tong Zhang wrote: >> Kernel Version: 4.18.5 >> >> Problem Description: >> >> When using prctl(PR_SET_NAME) to set the thread name, it is checked by >> security_task_prctl. >> >> We discovered a leaking path that can also use method implemented in >> fs/proc/base.c:1526 comm_write(), to do similar thing without asking LSM’s >> decision. > > I don't understand how it is a problem. Could you please explain? > procfs/comm is created with S_IRUGO|S_IWUSR permissions. So > prctl and procfs are simply different interfaces.
