Quoting Andrew Morton ([email protected]):
> On Tue, 29 May 2007 06:01:09 -0700 [email protected] wrote:
>
> > This patch adds support for container_clone(), a speculative interface
> > to creating new containers intended to be used for systems such as
> > namespace unsharing.
> >
> > ...
> >
> > +
> > +static atomic_t namecnt;
> > +static void get_unused_name(char *buf)
> > +{
> > + sprintf(buf, "node%d", atomic_inc_return(&namecnt));
> > +}
>
> A stupid thing, but a sufficiently determined attacker could cause this to
> wrap.
Yeah, this was very consciously done as a "just make it work for now"
naming system. If we want to stick with this naming, then I suppose we
could do a global bitmap.
But imo this naming is not very convenient - it would be nicer if we
a) allowed users to specify a name (not sure how that would work
logistically)
b) made the namecnt variable for automatically named containers
be per-directory. I'd much rather see
/containers/node1/node1
/containers/node2
than
/containers/node1/node3
/containers/node2
(assuming /node2 was created between /node1 and /node1/node1 or
/node1/node3)
thanks,
-serge
-
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]
