Re: BSD jail

[Serge E. Hallyn]

Quoting Joshua Hudson (joshudson@xxxxxxxxx):
> Why would you want a virtual network device implementation? The whole

So that a jailed process can use the net but can't use your network
address (intercept ssh, imap/stunnel, etc).

> I do like the idea of patching in through LSM, however not everything
> can be done there.
> In particular, I could escape from the jail as implemented there by a
> classic chroot()
> trick.

As Alan Cox had noted,  you can escape with the help of an outside
process, but the classic chroot(TEMPDIR);chdir(..);...;chroot(.)
did not work against either the namespace-based or certainly not the
older (inode_permission-based) implementation.

But in the end vserver with read-only bind mounts seems a better way to
go imo.

-serge

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/