linux-kernel - Re: [patch 05/10] add "permit user mounts in new namespace" clone flag

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]

Message-Id: <E1HcFx1-0001Zr-00@dorka.pomaz.szeredi.hu>
Date:	Fri, 13 Apr 2007 09:12:07 +0200
From:	Miklos Szeredi <miklos@...redi.hu>
To:	ebiederm@...ssion.com
CC:	serue@...ibm.com, containers@...ts.osdl.org, viro@....linux.org.uk,
	linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
	linuxram@...ibm.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [patch 05/10] add "permit user mounts in new namespace" clone flag

> Given the existence of shared subtrees allowing/denying this at the mount
> namespace level is silly and wrong.
> 
> If we need more than just the filesystem permission checks can we
> make it a mount flag settable with mount and remount that allows
> non-privileged users the ability to create mount points under it
> in directories they have full read/write access to.

OK, that makes sense.

> I don't like the use of clone flags for this purpose but in this
> case the shared subtress are a much more fundamental reasons for not
> doing this at the namespace level.

I'll drop the clone flag, and add a mount flag instead.

Thanks,
Miklos
-
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/