linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] Version 4 (2.6.23-rc8-mm2) Smack: Simplified Mandatory Access Control Kernel

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: <20071003181722.GL8181@ftp.linux.org.uk>
Date:	Wed, 3 Oct 2007 19:17:22 +0100
From:	Al Viro <viro@....linux.org.uk>
To:	Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Cc:	Casey Schaufler <casey@...aufler-ca.com>, torvalds@...l.org,
	linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, akpm@...l.org, paul.moore@...com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Version 4 (2.6.23-rc8-mm2) Smack: Simplified Mandatory Access Control Kernel

On Wed, Oct 03, 2007 at 07:17:35PM +0100, Alan Cox wrote:
> > Absolute paths in that kind of thing are _wrong_.  You know where the things
> > are on your fs.  You don't know if anything else will be visible, let alone
> > whether it will be at the same place in all chroots or namespaces.  And no,
> > you _can't_ make sure that fs is visible only in one place.  No fs can or
> > has any business even trying.
> 
> What I don't understand here is why we need the hacks when we already
> support sufficient mount magic to give each login session its own
> private /tmp ?

Presumably his context can change within a login session?  If not, it's
indeed simply worthless, absolute paths or not.
-
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/