Kirill Korotaev wrote:
> This patch looks as an overkill for me.
it's a standalone patch. It can be dropped. I think there is some value to
it as we already agree
> If you really care about things you describe, you can forbid unsharing
> in cases:
>
> 1.
> undo_list = tsk->sysvsem.undo_list;
> if (undo_list)
> REFUSE_UNSHARE;
> 2. vma exists with vma->vm_ops == &shm_vm_ops;
> 3. file opened with f_op == &shm_file_operations
and there are also the netlink sockets mq_notify.
OK, so we agree that ipc namespaces cannot be unshared without extra
checks. I like the firewall approach : it's not safe, don't allow it. Which
is what the patch is doing : we can't unshare ipc namespace safely so let's
just forbid it :
if (unshare_flags & CLONE_NEWIPC)
goto bad_unshare_out;
simple, nop ? :)
> I also dislike exec() operation for such sort of things since you can
> have no executable at hands due to changed fs namespace.
what do you mean ? fs namespace doesn't change bc you need it to load the
new process image/interpreter.
C.
-
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]
