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: <50293BE9.3010408@parallels.com> Date: Mon, 13 Aug 2012 21:39:53 +0400 From: Stanislav Kinsbursky <skinsbursky@...allels.com> To: "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@...ldses.org> CC: Pavel Emelianov <xemul@...allels.com>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>, "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 13.08.2012 20:47, J. Bruce Fields пишет: > On Sat, Aug 11, 2012 at 03:15:24PM +0400, Stanislav Kinsbursky wrote: >> 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. > I don't understand--the rpcbind sockets are created by the kernel. What > am I missing? Kernel preform connect to rpcbind socket (i.e. user-space binds it), doesn't it? > > --b. -- 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