[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <46FA334F.7030802@davidnewall.com>
Date: Wed, 26 Sep 2007 19:54:15 +0930
From: David Newall <david@...idnewall.com>
To: Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
CC: "Serge E. Hallyn" <serge@...lyn.com>,
Bill Davidsen <davidsen@....com>,
Philipp Marek <philipp@...ek.priv.at>, 7eggert@....de,
majkls <majkls@...pere.com>, bunk@...tum.de,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Chroot bug
Alan Cox wrote:
>> Good call. Though I suppose, since it's used 24x7 to aid security on
>> countless production servers, that security dwarfs testing. Still,
>> debugging, yes that's valid.
>>
>> I don't suppose it makes and difference; whatever the purpose, a chroot
>> that doesn't change the root is buggy.
>>
>
> It does change the root, it just doesn't guarantee you can't change it
> back - which is correct POSIX, Unix, SuS behaviour. So either everyone
> else is wrong or you are.. I know who I am betting on
>
Charming. They really say that, do they? Where? I find no such thing,
and I looked. I did find Open Groups SuS which, similar to SCO's UNIX,
says:
> The dot-dot entry in the root directory is interpreted to mean the
> root directory itself. Thus, dot-dot cannot be used to access files
> outside the subtree rooted at the root directory.
I feel I've presented a good case that that it's a bug. You made a
somewhat rude counter-claim, which I don't ascribe to malevolence.
You're simply disinterested. Nobody else cares, so why expend effort on
it, right? I'll let it drop, but it is a bug.
-
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