[systemd-devel] [PATCH] core/service: check if mainpid matches only if it set

Lennart Poettering lennart at poettering.net
Thu Feb 13 17:38:48 PST 2014

On Fri, 14.02.14 02:24, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek (zbyszek at in.waw.pl) wrote:

> On Fri, Feb 14, 2014 at 02:07:36AM +0100, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> > On Mon, 30.12.13 17:26, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek (zbyszek at in.waw.pl) wrote:
> > 
> > >  
> > > -        if (s->notify_access == NOTIFY_MAIN && pid != s->main_pid) {
> > > +        if (s->notify_access == NOTIFY_MAIN && s->main_pid != 0 && pid != s->main_pid) {
> > >                  log_warning_unit(u->id,
> > >                                   "%s: Got notification message from PID %lu, but reception only permitted for PID %lu",
> > >                                   u->id, (unsigned long) pid, (unsigned long) s->main_pid);
> > >                  return;
> > 
> > Hmm, this doesn't look right. This is about access control after all,
> > and we shouldn't allow these updates to be accepted from just anybody,
> > just because we don't know the main pid...
> > 
> > I have now changed this so that if we don't know the main pid, we will
> > print this at a lower log level (debug) and be less confusing with PID
> > == 0...
> > 
> > Does that make sense?
> No, I'm afraid that this actually exacerbates the original problem:
> in the bug report httpd.service/start times out because the notification
> is rejected. With your change it will be ignored silently (unless debugging
> is turned on, of course).
> I'm not convinced that accepting updates from "anyone" until MAINPID is known
> is bad. What about adding a note in the manpage:
>   Note: initially systemd will accept notification from any process
>   inside the service.  Make sure that systemd has been notified about
>   the value of $MAINPID before starting any untrusted processes.

So, what I am afraid of here is that some process has some unpriviliged
children (CGI scripts or so), and for some reason they stay around after
the daemon itself is already terminated, and then can confuse
things... I mean, let's say somebody sets KillMode=none, and thus
processes can survive all the way into the next process start, and can
then quickly confuse systemd that they are the real main pid or so (for
example, by sending MAINPID= or so...). Or even if we consider the
KillMode=none thing irrelevant, then there might still be a small window
where the main pid is already dead and we kill the other processes and
wait for them and they then send us invalid data?


Lennart Poettering, Red Hat

More information about the systemd-devel mailing list