[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <46FA71E0.8080406@prepere.com>
Date: Wed, 26 Sep 2007 16:51:12 +0200
From: Miloslav Semler <majkls@...pere.com>
To: Al Viro <viro@....linux.org.uk>
CC: Kyle Moffett <mrmacman_g4@....com>,
David Newall <david@...idnewall.com>,
Adrian Bunk <bunk@...nel.org>,
Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
"Serge E. Hallyn" <serge@...lyn.com>,
Bill Davidsen <davidsen@....com>,
Philipp Marek <philipp@...ek.priv.at>, 7eggert@....de,
bunk@...tum.de, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Chroot bug
Al Viro napsal(a):
> On Wed, Sep 26, 2007 at 03:11:33PM +0200, Miloslav Semler wrote:
>
>>> As for the nested-chroot() bit, the root user inside of a chroot is
>>> always allowed to chroot(). This is necessary for test-suites for
>>> various distro installers, chroot once to enter the installer playpen,
>>> installer chroots again to configure the test-installed-system. Once
>>> you allow a second chroot, you're back at the "can't reliably and
>>> efficiently track directory sub-tree members" problem.
>>>
>>> So if you think it can and should be fixed, then PROVIDE THE CODE.
>>>
>> Miloslav Semler
>>
>
> man openat
>
> This is really pointless, anyway - any code that expects chroot to be
> root-proof is terminally broken.
>
So thanks for information. I did't know anything about *at functions. So
it seems to be more complicated. But maybe it will be good write to
manpage "other systems implement it by other way, so this feature is
unportable".
-
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