Re: [PATCH 2/18] cleanups and bug fix in do_loopback()

[Ram Pai]

On Tue, 2005-11-08 at 01:28, Miklos Szeredi wrote:
> > > I see no other reason for wanting to prevent binds from detached
> > > mounts or other namespaces.  It has been discussed that it would be a
> > > good _controlled_ way to send/receive mounts from other namespace
> > > without adding any complexity.
> > 
> > AFAICT, the ability to bind across namespaces defeats the private-ness
> > property of per-process-namespaces. 
> 
> No.  The privateness is guaranteed by proc_check_root(), which is
> similar, but not the same as check_mnt(), and wich restrict _access_
> to other namespaces.
> check_mnt() restricts operations on other namespaces if you _already_
> have access to said namespace.  For example via a file descriptor sent
> between two processes in different namespaces.

 Yes there is some contradiction of some sorts on this. private-ness
means that the namespace must _not_ be accesible to processes
in other namespace. But 'file descriptor sent between two processes in
different namespaces' seems to break that guarantee.  

> 
> Also with ptrace() you can still access other process's namespace, so
> proc_check_root() is also too strict (or ptrace() too lax).

same here.

RP

> 
> Miklos

-
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/