lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2002]   [Jul]   [19]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: more thoughts on a new jail() system call
From
Date
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/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:27    [W:0.123 / U:0.192 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site