[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20070421013622.1f2a7d00.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2007 01:36:22 -0700
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@...redi.hu>
Cc: serue@...ibm.com, viro@....linux.org.uk, linuxram@...ibm.com,
ebiederm@...ssion.com, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, containers@...ts.osdl.org
Subject: Re: [patch 2/8] allow unprivileged umount
On Sat, 21 Apr 2007 10:09:42 +0200 Miklos Szeredi <miklos@...redi.hu> wrote:
> > > +static bool permit_umount(struct vfsmount *mnt, int flags)
> > > +{
> > >
> > > ...
> > >
> > > + return mnt->mnt_uid == current->uid;
> > > +}
> >
> > Yes, this seems very wrong. I'd have thought that comparing user_struct*'s
> > would get us a heck of a lot closer to being able to support aliasing of
> > UIDs between different namespaces.
> >
>
> OK, I'll fix this up.
>
> Actually an earlier version of this patch did use user_struct's but
> I'd changed it to uids, because it's simpler.
OK..
> I didn't think about
> this being contrary to the id namespaces thing.
Well I was madly assuming that when serarate UID namespaces are in use, UID
42 in container A will have a different user_struct from UID 42 in
container B. I'd suggest that we provoke an opinion from Eric & co before
you do work on this.
-
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