[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1484231997.15816.36.camel@edumazet-glaptop3.roam.corp.google.com>
Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2017 06:39:57 -0800
From: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
To: Krister Johansen <kjlx@...pleofstupid.com>
Cc: Stephen Hemminger <stephen@...workplumber.org>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 net-next] Introduce a sysctl that modifies the value
of PROT_SOCK.
On Wed, 2017-01-11 at 22:52 -0800, Krister Johansen wrote:
> Add net.ipv4.ip_unprotected_port_start, which is a per namespace sysctl
> that denotes the first unprotected inet port in the namespace. To
> disable all protected ports set this to zero. It also checks for
> overlap with the local port range. The protected and local range may
> not overlap.
>
> The use case for this change is to allow containerized processes to bind
> to priviliged ports, but prevent them from ever being allowed to modify
> their container's network configuration. The latter is accomplished by
> ensuring that the network namespace is not a child of the user
> namespace. This modification was needed to allow the container manager
> to disable a namespace's priviliged port restrictions without exposing
> control of the network namespace to processes in the user namespace.
>
> Signed-off-by: Krister Johansen <kjlx@...pleofstupid.com>
> ---
> include/net/ip.h | 10 +++++++++
> include/net/netns/ipv4.h | 1 +
> net/ipv4/af_inet.c | 5 ++++-
> net/ipv4/sysctl_net_ipv4.c | 50 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
> net/ipv6/af_inet6.c | 3 ++-
> net/netfilter/ipvs/ip_vs_ctl.c | 7 +++---
> net/sctp/socket.c | 10 +++++----
> security/selinux/hooks.c | 3 ++-
Adding a new sysctl without documentation is generally not accepted.
Please take a look at Documentation/networking/ip-sysctl.txt
BTW, sticking to 'unprivileged' ports might be better than 'unprotected'
which is vague.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists