linux-kernel - Re: [RFC 1/1] shiftfs: uid/gid shifting bind mount

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: <20170207194933.GB4393@infradead.org>
Date:   Tue, 7 Feb 2017 11:49:33 -0800
From:   Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
To:     James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...senPartnership.com>
Cc:     Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
        Amir Goldstein <amir73il@...il.com>,
        Djalal Harouni <tixxdz@...il.com>, Chris Mason <clm@...com>,
        Theodore Tso <tytso@....edu>,
        Josh Triplett <josh@...htriplett.org>,
        "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
        Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
        Seth Forshee <seth.forshee@...onical.com>,
        linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        LSM List <linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org>,
        Dongsu Park <dongsu@...ocode.com>,
        David Herrmann <dh.herrmann@...glemail.com>,
        Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@...hat.com>,
        Alban Crequy <alban.crequy@...il.com>,
        Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
        "Serge E. Hallyn" <serge@...lyn.com>, Phil Estes <estesp@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC 1/1] shiftfs: uid/gid shifting bind mount

On Tue, Feb 07, 2017 at 11:02:03AM -0800, James Bottomley wrote:
> >   Another option would be to require something like a project as used 
> > for project quotas as the root.  This would also be conveniant as it 
> > could storge the used remapping tables.
> 
> So this would be like the current project quota except set on a
> subtree?  I could see it being done that way but I don't see what
> advantage it has over using flags in the subtree itself (the mapping is
> known based on the mount namespace, so there's really only a single bit
> of information to store).

projects (which are the underling concept for project quotas) are
per-subtree in practice - the flag is set on an inode and then
all directories and files underneath inherit the project ID,
hardlinking outside a project is prohinited.