[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1447943873.2240617.444348369.7F817E6C@webmail.messagingengine.com>
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2015 09:37:53 -0500
From: Colin Walters <walters@...bum.org>
To: Richard Weinberger <richard@....at>,
James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org>
Cc: Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
Seth Forshee <seth.forshee@...onical.com>,
Austin S Hemmelgarn <ahferroin7@...il.com>,
"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
linux-bcache@...r.kernel.org,
"device-mapper development" <dm-devel@...hat.com>,
linux-raid@...r.kernel.org, linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org,
"linux-fsdevel" <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
LSM <linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org>,
selinux@...ho.nsa.gov, Serge Hallyn <serge.hallyn@...onical.com>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@....edu>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 0/7] User namespace mount updates
On Thu, Nov 19, 2015, at 02:53 AM, Richard Weinberger wrote:
> Erm, I don't want this in the kernel. That's why I've proposed the lklfuse approach.
I already said this before but just to repeat, since I'm confused:
How would "lklfuse" be different from http://libguestfs.org/
which we at Red Hat (and a number of other organizations)
use quite widely now for build systems, debugging etc.
In the end it's just running the kernel in KVM with a custom protocol,
with support for non-filesystem things like "install a bootloader",
and it already supports FUSE.
I'm pretty firmly with Al here - the attack surface increase here
is too great, and we'd likely turn this off if it even did make it
into the kernel.
--
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