Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: more thoughts on a new jail() system call | From | Shaya Potter <> | Date | 19 Jul 2002 18:48:35 -0400 |
| |
On Thu, 2002-07-18 at 20:21, David Wagner wrote: > Shaya Potter wrote: > >sys_mknod) J - Need FIFO ability, everything else not. > > Beware the ability to pass file descriptors across Unix > domain sockets. This should probably be restricted somehow. > Along similar lines, you didn't mention sendmsg() and > recvmsg(), but the fd-passing parts should probably be > restricted.
not sure there has to be anything restricted, more so than the filesystem restrictions already. As from what I can tell from Stevens there are 2 ways to pass a fd over an AF_UNIX socket. either socketpair (parent/child relationship i.e. both in jail) or a named socket, which then its constrained to the jailed FS, and therefore only processes in that particular jail have access to it.
or am I wrong?
thanks,
shaya potter
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |