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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <CAPP7u0Vo6gB86S-hZcOW9Rmki8oKHd=Lyx3x-N9gjPC4JP_YxQ@mail.gmail.com> Date: Sat, 22 Dec 2018 23:48:54 +0100 From: Christian Brauner <christian.brauner@...onical.com> To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> Cc: nix.or.die@...il.com, "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>, ellierevves@...il.com, Linux List Kernel Mailing <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>, Seth Forshee <seth.forshee@...onical.com> Subject: Re: [BREAKAGE] Since 4.18, kernel sets SB_I_NODEV implicitly on userns mounts, breaking systemd-nspawn On Sat, Dec 22, 2018 at 11:20 PM Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> wrote: > > Eric, this is entirely unacceptable. i would like to point out that I send a revert for this in *July* before any kernel with this change was released for the exact same reason. But I was ignored and no one came to argumentative aid: - https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/containers/2018-July/039182.html - https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/containers/2018-July/039183.html To be fair, no one apart from me was pointing out that it actually breaks people including systemd folks even though I was bringing it up with them. I even tried to fix all of userspace after this got NACKED ( https://github.com/systemd/systemd/pull/9483 ). Christian > > On Sat, Dec 22, 2018 at 12:58 PM Gabriel C <nix.or.die@...il.com> wrote: > > > > Added some people to CC that might want to see this.. > > Thanks. > > > > Here's an email that was sent to lkml about the subject: > > > > > > https://lkml.org/lkml/2018/7/5/742 > > > > > > I link also this, quoting the last of it: > > > > > > https://lkml.org/lkml/2018/7/5/701 > > > > > > It has never been the case that mknod on a device node will guarantee > > > that you even can open the device node. The applications that regress > > > are broken. It doesn't mean we shouldn't be bug compatible, but we darn > > > well should document very clearly the bugs we are being bug compatible with. > > Yeah, this is complete garbage. > > We have very clear rules in the kernel: if some change breaks existing > setups, it is ABSOLUTELY NEVER the application that is broken. > > It is the kernel. > > There is absolutely zero gray areas here. Eric, your behavior is > entirely out of line, and now we apparently have a regression that > goes back to June that I was not told about because of your incorrect > stance. > > Eric, I want to make this 1000% clear: there are no user space bugs. > If it used to work, then user space was clearly doing the right thing. > The fact that you tried to several times claim it was buggy user space > is a serious breach of trust. You KNOW this is the case. > > Seriously. There are no excuses. > > That commit is now reverted in my tree, and furthermore I will not > take any pull requests from you until you have made it clear that you > comprehend this very fundamental issue. > > Why did it take so long for this issue to be elevated to me? > > Linus
Powered by blists - more mailing lists