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: <20080229174205.GB24296@sergelap.ibm.com>
Date:	Fri, 29 Feb 2008 11:42:05 -0600
From:	"Serge E. Hallyn" <serue@...ibm.com>
To:	Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@...nvz.org>
Cc:	"Serge E. Hallyn" <serue@...ibm.com>, Ian Kent <raven@...maw.net>,
	Jeff Moyer <jmoyer@...hat.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	autofs mailing list <autofs@...ux.kernel.org>,
	linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] autofs4 - track uid and gid of last mount requestor

Quoting Pavel Emelyanov (xemul@...nvz.org):
> > The way the user namespaces work right now is similar to say the IPC
> > namespace - a task belongs to one user, that user belongs to precisely
> > one user namespace.
> > 
> > Even in my additional userns patches, I was changing uid to store the
> > (uid, userns) so a struct user still belonged to just one user
> > namespace.
> > 
> > In contrast, with pid namespaces a task is associated with a 'struct
> > pid' which links it to multiple process ids, one in each pid namespace
> > to which it belongs.
> > 
> > Perhaps we should be treating user namespaces like pid namespaces?
> 
> I'm afraid, that I'm just starting a new thread of discussion in a
> wrong place, but I can't refrain from asking "what for?"

For the reasons I listed there :)

> > So if I'm user 500 in what I think is the initial user namespace, I can
> > create a container with a new user namespace, the init task of which is
> > both uid 0 in the child userns, and uid 500 in the higher level,
> > automatically giving the container access to any files I own.
> 
> So do you mean that I can become a root, by calling clone()?

You can become root in the new container.  Your capabilities are
meaningful only to targets (users, files) which exist in the user
namespace in which you are root.  It becomes more precise than the
CAP_NS_OVERRIDE approach in my last patchset.

> Thanks,
> Pavel
--
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

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ