linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v1] fs: Add kfuncs to handle idmapped mounts

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: <ZKbRrziFf4tf09vo@infradead.org>
Date:   Thu, 6 Jul 2023 07:37:35 -0700
From:   Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
To:     Christian Brauner <brauner@...nel.org>
Cc:     Hou Tao <houtao@...weicloud.com>,
        Alexey Gladkov <legion@...nel.org>, bpf@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
        Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1] fs: Add kfuncs to handle idmapped mounts

On Tue, Jul 04, 2023 at 03:01:21PM +0200, Christian Brauner wrote:
> That's too much stability for my taste for these helpers. The helpers
> here exposed have been modified multiple times and once we wean off
> idmapped mounts from user namespaces completely they will change again.
> So I'm fine if they're traceable but not as kfuncs with any - even
> minimal - stability guarantees.

I fully agree.  I also don't think any eBPF program has any business
looking at idmapping.