Re: [PATCH v5 00/11] FUSE mounts from non-init user namespaces

[Eric W. Biederman]

Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@xxxxxxxxxx> writes:

> On Fri, Dec 22, 2017 at 3:32 PM, Dongsu Park <dongsu@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>> Patches 1-2 deal with an additional flag of lookup_bdev() to check for
>> additional inode permission.
>
> fuse_blk is less suitable for unprivileged mounting than plain fuse.
> fusermount doesn't allow mounting fuse_blk unprivileged, so there's
> little data about that usecase (IIRC ntfs3g guys did that, or at least
> tried to do it, but I don't remember the details).
>
> As such, I think we should leave it out of the initial version.  Which
> means you can drop patches 1-2 from this series.  Unless there's a
> strong use case for this.  In which case we should look hard at the
> differences between fuse_blk and fuse and how that affects
> unprivileged operation.   There are a few assumptions about fuse_blk
> filesystem being more "well behaved", I think.

Especially to start with I am fine with that.

It makes a lot of sense to get the obvious cases first.

Eric