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  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:   Wed, 14 Sep 2016 20:24:09 -0700
From:   Dmitry Torokhov <>
To:     "Eric W. Biederman" <>
Cc:     David Miller <>, Tejun Heo <>,
        lkml <>,
        netdev <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/5] Make /sys/class/net per net namespace objects belong
 to container

On Mon, Aug 29, 2016 at 5:38 AM, Eric W. Biederman
<> wrote:
> David Miller <> writes:
>> From: Dmitry Torokhov <>
>> Date: Tue, 16 Aug 2016 15:33:10 -0700
>>> There are objects in /sys hierarchy (/sys/class/net/) that logically belong
>>> to a namespace/container. Unfortunately all sysfs objects start their life
>>> belonging to global root, and while we could change ownership manually,
>>> keeping tracks of all objects that come and go is cumbersome. It would
>>> be better if kernel created them using correct uid/gid from the beginning.
>>> This series changes kernfs to allow creating object's with arbitrary
>>> uid/gid, adds get_ownership() callback to ktype structure so subsystems
>>> could supply their own logic (likely tied to namespace support) for
>>> determining ownership of kobjects, and adjusts sysfs code to make use of
>>> this information. Lastly net-sysfs is adjusted to make sure that objects in
>>> net namespace are owned by the root user from the owning user namespace.
>>> Note that we do not adjust ownership of objects moved into a new namespace
>>> (as when moving a network device into a container) as userspace can easily
>>> do it.
>> I need some domain experts to review this series please.
> I just came back from vacation and I will aim to take a look shortly.
> The big picture idea seems sensible.  Having a better ownship of sysfs
> files that are part of a network namespace.  I will have to look at the
> details to see if the implementation is similarly sensible.


Did you find anything objectionable in the series or should I fix up
the !CONFIG_SYSFS error in networking patch and resubmit?



Powered by blists - more mailing lists