Re: Detecting if you are running in a container

[J. Bruce Fields]

On Tue, Oct 11, 2011 at 02:16:24PM -0700, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> It actually isn't much complexity and for the most part the code that
> I care about in that area is already merged.  In principle all I care
> about are having the identiy checks go from:
> (uid1 == uid2) to ((user_ns1 == user_ns2) && (uid1 == uid2))
> 
> There are some per subsystem sysctls that do make sense to make per
> subsystem and that work is mostly done.  I expect there are a few
> more in the networking stack that interesting to make per network
> namespace.
> 
> The only real world issue right now that I am aware of is the user
> namespace aren't quite ready for prime-time and so people run into
> issues where something like sysctl -a during bootup sets a bunch of
> sysctls and they change sysctls they didn't mean to.  Once the
> user namespaces are in place accessing a truly global sysctl will
> result in EPERM when you are in a container and everyone will be
> happy. ;)
> 
> 
> Where all of this winds up interesting in the field of oncoming kernel
> work is that uids are persistent and are stored in file systems.  So
> once we have all of the permission checks in the kernel tweaked to care
> about user namespaces we next look at the filesystems.   The easy
> initial implementation is going to be just associating a user namespace
> with a super block.  But farther out being able to store uids from
> different user namespaces on the same filesystem becomes an interesting
> problem.

Yipes.  Why would anyone want to do that?

--b.

> We already have things like user mapping in 9p and nfsv4 so it isn't
> wholly uncharted territory.  But it could get interesting.   Just
> a heads up.
--
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/