linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] Add pidfs filesystem

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]

Date:   Wed, 22 Feb 2017 21:11:22 +0100
From:   Richard Weinberger <richard.weinberger@...il.com>
To:     "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>
Cc:     Alexey Gladkov <gladkov.alexey@...il.com>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@...temov.name>,
        Vasiliy Kulikov <segoon@...nwall.com>,
        Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
        Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
        Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@...allels.com>,
        Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Add pidfs filesystem

On Mon, Feb 20, 2017 at 5:05 AM, Eric W. Biederman
<ebiederm@...ssion.com> wrote:
> Alexey Gladkov <gladkov.alexey@...il.com> writes:
>
>> The pidfs filesystem contains a subset of the /proc file system which
>> contains only information about the processes.
>
> My summary of your motivation.
>
> It hurts when I create a container with a processes with uid 0 inside of
> it.  This generates lots of hacks to attempt to limit uid 0.
>
>   My answer:  Don't run a container with a real uid 0 inside of it.

I agree. Unless I miss something I'd say use a user namespace
to get decent permission checks in /proc (and /sys).

-- 
Thanks,
//richard