[lkml]   [1996]   [Nov]   [15]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: Glitch in sys_chroot()

On Thu, 14 Nov 1996, Elliot Lee wrote:

> I still think that Linux should do the chdir() before the chroot(). If you
> can provide a reason why - besides "because that's the way it has been
> done" - I'd say you have a valid point. Until then I remain unconvinced,
> because of the possible security concerns from lax programming.

I don't think chroot() should do a chdir(). Why? Simply because chroot()
is chroot() and chdir() is chdir(). Keep it simple.

What if the current directory is, say, /usr/foo/bar/baz and you do a
chroot("/usr/foo"). Should the chroot() do a chdir("/usr/foo") then also?
I don't think so. This would definitely break a lot of old code.

The semantics could of course be changed so that the chdir() is done if
the current directory is outside the new root, but I think that would
unneccesarily complicate both the semantics and the code.

Johan Myreen

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:38    [W:0.149 / U:0.824 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site