[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAG48ez1OVKqRZe6AtTwXSc27AjNF596nt-46J9WPffKu7fNb8Q@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 9 Oct 2018 14:43:56 +0200
From: Jann Horn <jannh@...gle.com>
To: Laurent Vivier <laurent@...ier.eu>
Cc: kernel list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>, dima@...sta.com,
Linux API <linux-api@...r.kernel.org>,
James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...senpartnership.com>,
Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, avagin@...il.com,
containers@...ts.linux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [RFC v5 1/1] ns: add binfmt_misc to the user namespace
On Tue, Oct 9, 2018 at 12:38 PM Laurent Vivier <laurent@...ier.eu> wrote:
> This patch allows to have a different binfmt_misc configuration
> for each new user namespace. By default, the binfmt_misc configuration
> is the one of the previous level, but if the binfmt_misc filesystem is
> mounted in the new namespace a new empty binfmt instance is created and
> used in this namespace.
>
> For instance, using "unshare" we can start a chroot of an another
> architecture and configure the binfmt_misc interpreter without being root
> to run the binaries in this chroot.
[...]
> @@ -823,12 +847,34 @@ static const struct super_operations s_ops = {
> static int bm_fill_super(struct super_block *sb, void *data, int silent)
> {
> int err;
> + struct user_namespace *ns = sb->s_user_ns;
> static const struct tree_descr bm_files[] = {
> [2] = {"status", &bm_status_operations, S_IWUSR|S_IRUGO},
> [3] = {"register", &bm_register_operations, S_IWUSR},
> /* last one */ {""}
> };
>
> + /* create a new binfmt namespace
> + * if we are not in the first user namespace
> + * but the binfmt namespace is the first one
> + */
> + if (READ_ONCE(ns->binfmt_ns) == NULL) {
> + struct binfmt_namespace *new_ns;
> +
> + new_ns = kmalloc(sizeof(struct binfmt_namespace),
> + GFP_KERNEL);
> + if (new_ns == NULL)
> + return -ENOMEM;
> + INIT_LIST_HEAD(&new_ns->entries);
> + new_ns->enabled = 1;
> + rwlock_init(&new_ns->entries_lock);
> + new_ns->bm_mnt = NULL;
> + new_ns->entry_count = 0;
> + /* ensure new_ns is completely initialized before sharing it */
> + smp_wmb();
> + WRITE_ONCE(ns->binfmt_ns, new_ns);
> + }
You're still not preventing a concurrent race of two mount() calls,
right? What prevents two instances of this code block from running
concurrently in two different namespaces? I think you want to take
some sort of global lock around this.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists