Re: FUSE merging?

[Andrew Morton]

Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>  However, a few things:
> 
>  - is there anything in the current implementation of the permission stuff
>    which might tie our hands if it is later reimplemented?  IOW: does the
>    current FUSE user interface in any way lock us into the current FUSE
>    implementation (fuse_allow_task())?
> 
>  - the fuse mount options don't seem to be documented
> 
>  - aren't we going to remove the nfs semi-server feature?
> 
>  - Frank points out that a user can send a sigstop to his own setuid(0)
>    task and he intimates that this could cause DoS problems with FUSE.  More
>    details needed please?
> 
>  - I don't recall seeing an exhaustive investigation of how an
>    unprivileged user could use a FUSE mount to implement DoS attacks against
>    other users or against root.

You say

  "If a sysadmin trusts the users enough, or can ensure through other
   measures, that system processes will never enter non-privileged mounts,
   it can relax the last limitation with a "user_allow_other" config
   option.  If this config option is set, the mounting user can add the
   "allow_other" mount option which disables the check for other users'
   processes."

What config option, where?

-
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/