linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH 02/27] containers: Implement containers as kernel objects

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Tue, 19 Feb 2019 18:20:20 -0800
From:   James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...senPartnership.com>
To:     David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>
Cc:     keyrings@...r.kernel.org, trond.myklebust@...merspace.com,
        sfrench@...ba.org, linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-nfs@...r.kernel.org, linux-cifs@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, rgb@...hat.com,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        containers@...ts.linux-foundation.org, cgroups@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 02/27] containers: Implement containers as kernel
 objects

On Tue, 2019-02-19 at 23:06 +0000, David Howells wrote:
> James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...senPartnership.com> wrote:
> 
> > I thought we got agreement years ago that containers don't exist in
> > Linux as a single entity: they're currently a collection of cgroups
> > and namespaces some of which may and some of which may not be local
> > to the entity the orchestration system thinks of as a "container".
> 
> I wasn't party to that agreement and don't feel particularly bound by
> it.

That's not at all relevant, is it?  The point is we have widespread
uses of namespaces and cgroups that span containers today meaning that
a "container id" becomes a problematic concept.  What we finally got to
with the audit people was an unmodifiable label which the orchestration
system can set ... can't you just use that?

James