lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2018]   [Feb]   [13]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: plan9 semantics on Linux - mount namespaces
From
Date
On 13.02.2018 22:12, Enrico Weigelt wrote:

CC @containers@lists.linux-foundation.org

> Hi folks,
>
>
> I'm currently trying to implement plan9 semantics on Linux and
> yet sorting out how to do the mount namespace handling.
>
> On plan9, any unprivileged process can create its own namespace
> and mount/bind at will, while on Linux this requires CAP_SYS_ADMIN.
>
> What is the reason for not allowing arbitrary users to create their
> own private mount namespace ? What could go wrong here ?
>
> IMHO, we could allow mount/bind under the following conditions:
>
> * the process is in a private mount namespace
> * no suid-flag is honored (either force all mounts to nosuid or
>   completely mask it out)
> * only certain whitelisted filesystems allowed (eg. 9P and FUSE)
>
> Maybe that all could be enabled by a new capability.
>
>
> any suggestions ?
>
>
> --mtx
>


--
Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult
Free software and Linux embedded engineering
info@metux.net -- +49-151-27565287

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2018-02-13 23:21    [W:0.057 / U:3.300 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site