> Except that we don't have the concept of a mount owner at the VFS level
> right now, because everyone is adding stupid suid wrapper hacks instead
> of trying to fix the problems for real.
Having a mount owner is not a problem. Having a good policy for
accepting mounts is rather more so, according to some:
http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=linux-kernel&m=107705608603071&w=2
Just a little taste of what that policy would involve:
- global limit on user mounts
- possibly per user limit on mounts
- acceptable mountpoints (unlimited writablity is probably a good minimum)
- acceptable mount options (nosuid, nodev are obviously not)
- filesystems "safe" to mount by users
I'm not against something like that, but I'd like to hear other
people's opinion before trying to push a solution to mainline.
Thanks,
Miklos
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
