linux-kernel - Re: [RESEND PATCH v6 0/5] proc: subset=pid: Relax check of mount visibility

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: <20251213180040.750109-1-danilklishch@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 13 Dec 2025 13:00:38 -0500
From: Dan Klishch <danilklishch@...il.com>
To: legion@...nel.org
Cc: containers@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
	ebiederm@...ssion.com,
	keescook@...omium.org,
	linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	viro@...iv.linux.org.uk
Subject: Re: [RESEND PATCH v6 0/5] proc: subset=pid: Relax check of mount visibility

> It is much easier to implement file access
> restrictions in procfs using an ebpf controller.

But if we already have a masked /proc from podman/docker/user who
decided to run `mount --bind /dev/null /proc/smth`, the sandbox will
not have a choice other than to bail out. Also, correct me if I am
wrong, installing ebpf controller requires CAP_BPF in initial
userns, so rootless podman will not be able to mask /proc "properly"
even if someone sends a patch switching it to ebpf.

Thanks,
Dan Klishch