[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1176299311.3377.6.camel@raven.themaw.net>
Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2007 21:48:30 +0800
From: Ian Kent <raven@...maw.net>
To: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@...redi.hu>
Cc: hpa@...or.com, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, util-linux-ng@...r.kernel.org,
containers@...ts.osdl.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [patch 0/8] unprivileged mount syscall
On Wed, 2007-04-11 at 12:48 +0200, Miklos Szeredi wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >> - users can use bind mounts without having to pre-configure them in
> > > >> /etc/fstab
> > > >>
> > >
> > > This is by far the biggest concern I see. I think the security
> > > implication of allowing anyone to do bind mounts are poorly understood.
> >
> > And especially so since there is no way for a filesystem module to veto
> > such requests.
>
> The filesystem can't veto initial mounts based on destination either.
> I don't think it's up to the filesystem to police bind/move mounts in
> any way.
But if a filesystem can't or the developer thinks that it shouldn't for
some reason, support bind/move mounts then there should be a way for the
filesystem to tell the kernel that.
Surely a filesystem is in a good position to be able to decide if a
mount request "for it" should be allowed to continue based on it's "own
situation and capabilities".
Ian
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists