[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20150224153329.GA2415@fieldses.org>
Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2015 10:33:29 -0500
From: "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@...ldses.org>
To: Benjamin Coddington <bcodding@...hat.com>
Cc: Ian Kent <ikent@...hat.com>,
"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Oleg Nesterov <onestero@...hat.com>,
Trond Myklebust <trond.myklebust@...marydata.com>,
Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>,
Jeff Layton <jeff.layton@...marydata.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 5/8] KEYS: exec request-key within the requesting
task's init namespace
On Mon, Feb 23, 2015 at 05:22:12PM -0800, Benjamin Coddington wrote:
> That sounds a lot closer to some of the work I've been doing to see if I can
> come up with a way to solve the "where's the namespace I need?" problem.
>
> I agree with Greg's very early comments that the easiest way to determine
> which namespace context a process should use is to keep it as a copy of
> the task -- and the place that copy should be done is fork().
So you're suggesting that the key_agent could be that copy? But:
> ... If not, then the calling process itself is forked/execve-ed into a
> new persistent key_agent that is installed on the calling process'
> keyrings just like a key, and with the same lifetime and GC
> expectations of a key.
>
> A key_agent is a user-space process...
If the key_agent can die before it's needed, then we have to keep around
some other context information to allow regenerating a new one. So what
is that piece of information? Aren't we back where we started?
--b.
--
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