lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2008]   [Sep]   [4]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: unprivileged mounts git tree
From
Date
On Thu, 4 Sep 2008, Serge E. Hallyn wrote:
> Quoting Miklos Szeredi (miklos@szeredi.hu):
> > On Thu, 04 Sep 2008, Miklos Szeredi wrote:
> > > On Thu, 4 Sep 2008, Serge E. Hallyn wrote:
> > > > Are you going to revert the change forcing CL_SLAVE for
> > > > !capable(CAP_SYS_ADMIN)? I don't think we want that - I think that
> > > > *within* a set of user mounts, propagation should be safe, right?
> > > >
> > > > Will you be able to do this soon? If not, should we just do the part
> > > > returning -EPERM when turning a shared mount into a user mount?
> > >
> > > OK, let's do that first and the tricky part (propagation vs. user
> > > mounts) later. Will push after I've tested it.
> >
> > Here it is:
> >
> > git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/mszeredi/vfs.git unprivileged-mounts
>
> but you're still doing
>
> if (IS_MNT_SHARED(old_nd.path.mnt) && !capable(CAP_SYS_ADMIN))
> goto out;
>
> shouldn't it be something like
>
> if (IS_MNT_SHARED(old_nd.path.mnt) && (old_nd.path.mnt & MNT_USER))
> goto out;
>
> ?

Why would that be an error? There's no real security gain to be had
from restricting a privileged user, but could cause a lot of
annoyance. If we think this is dangerous, then protection should be
built into mount(8) with an option to override. But not into the
kernel, IMO.

Miklos


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2008-09-04 19:45    [W:1.252 / U:0.356 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site