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  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]
Date:	Sat, 11 Aug 2012 15:15:24 +0400
From:	Stanislav Kinsbursky <skinsbursky@...allels.com>
To:	Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@...allels.com>
CC:	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
	Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
	"J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@...ldses.org>,
	"Trond.Myklebust@...app.com" <Trond.Myklebust@...app.com>,
	"davem@...emloft.net" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	"linux-nfs@...r.kernel.org" <linux-nfs@...r.kernel.org>,
	"eric.dumazet@...il.com" <eric.dumazet@...il.com>,
	"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"viro@...iv.linux.org.uk" <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
	"tim.c.chen@...ux.intel.com" <tim.c.chen@...ux.intel.com>,
	"devel@...nvz.org" <devel@...nvz.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/2] net: connect to UNIX sockets from specified root

11.08.2012 10:23, Pavel Emelyanov пишет:
> On 08/11/2012 03:09 AM, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
>> On 08/10/2012 12:28 PM, Alan Cox wrote:
>>> Explicitly for Linux yes - this is not generally true of the AF_UNIX
>>> socket domain and even the permissions aspect isn't guaranteed to be
>>> supported on some BSD environments !
>> Yes, but let's worry about what the Linux behavior should be.
>>
>>> The name is however just a proxy for the socket itself. You don't even
>>> get a device node in the usual sense or the same inode in the file system
>>> space.
>>
>> No, but it is looked up the same way any other inode is (the difference
>> between FIFOs and sockets is that sockets have separate connections,
>> which is also why open() on sockets would be nice.)
>>
>> However, there is a fundamental difference between AF_UNIX sockets and
>> open(), and that is how the pathname is delivered.  It thus would make
>> more sense to provide the openat()-like information in struct
>> sockaddr_un, but that may be very hard to do in a sensible way.  In that
>> sense it perhaps would be cleaner to be able to do an open[at]() on the
>> socket node with O_PATH (perhaps there should be an O_SOCKET option,
>> even?) and pass the resulting file descriptor to bind() or connect().
> I vote for this (openat + O_WHATEVER on a unix socket) as well. It will
> help us in checkpoint-restore, making handling of overmounted/unlinked
> sockets much cleaner.

I have to notice, that it's not enough and doesn't solve the issue.
There should be some way how to connect/bind already existent unix 
socket (from kernel, at least), because socket can be created in user space.
And this way (sock operation or whatever) have to provide an ability to 
lookup UNIX socket starting from specified root to support containers.

>
>> 	-hpa
> Thanks,
> Pavel
>

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Powered by blists - more mailing lists