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  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]
Date:	Sun, 8 Nov 2009 09:09:35 -0600
From:	"Serge E. Hallyn" <serue@...ibm.com>
To:	Oren Laadan <orenl@...rato.com>
Cc:	Sukadev Bhattiprolu <sukadev@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>, arnd@...db.de,
	Containers <containers@...ts.linux-foundation.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>, hpa@...or.com,
	Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@...nvz.org>,
	Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...il.com>, roland@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [v11][PATCH 9/9] Document clone_with_pids() syscall

Quoting Oren Laadan (orenl@...rato.com):
> Sukadev Bhattiprolu wrote:
> > Matt Helsley [matthltc@...ibm.com] wrote:
> > | > If userspace passes an array with n pids and there are k namespace levels
> > | > then clone_with_pids() makes sure that the kernel sees a pid array like:
> > | > 
> > | > index	  0     ... k - (n + 1)        ...          k - 1
> > | > 	+-----------------------+-------------------------+
> > | > pid_t	| 0 ..................0 | <copied from userspace> |
> > | > 	+-----------------------+-------------------------+
> > | 
> > | (diagram assumes n != k. If n == k then pids[0] is the pid desired
> > | in the initial namespace..)
> > 
> > True.
> > 
> > Also I was not sure if we should prevent choosing pids in ancestor containers.
> > since a process is not even supposed to know of ancestor namespaces. Is there
> > a need for choosing pids in those namespaces.

Yes, that is necessary.

> > | I don't know if it makes more sense to change clone_with_pids() or have
> > | [e]glibc wrappers swap the array contents.
> 
> I prefer to decide now on an order and stick to it in the kernel and
> in glibc.

Agreed!

I'd forgotten that, as Matt said, we can just specify pids to the depth
that we want, so I guess the current order is fine.

-serge
--
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