[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20200114043924.GV8904@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2020 04:39:24 +0000
From: Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>
To: Ian Kent <raven@...maw.net>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Aleksa Sarai <cyphar@...har.com>,
David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
Eric Biederman <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
stable <stable@...r.kernel.org>,
Christian Brauner <christian.brauner@...ntu.com>,
Serge Hallyn <serge@...lyn.com>, dev@...ncontainers.org,
Linux Containers <containers@...ts.linux-foundation.org>,
Linux API <linux-api@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 0/1] mount: universally disallow mounting over
symlinks
On Tue, Jan 14, 2020 at 08:25:19AM +0800, Ian Kent wrote:
> This isn't right.
>
> There's actually nothing stopping a user from using a direct map
> entry that's a multi-mount without an actual mount at its root.
> So there could be directories created under these, it's just not
> usually done.
>
> I'm pretty sure I don't check and disallow this.
IDGI... How the hell will that work in v5? Who will set _any_
traps outside the one in root in that scenario? autofs_lookup()
won't (there it's conditional upon indirect mount). Neither
will autofs_dir_mkdir() (conditional upon version being less
than 5). Who will, then?
Confused...
Powered by blists - more mailing lists