Re: Chroot bug

[David Newall <david@davidnewall.com>]

Alan Cox wrote:
> > Good call.  Though I suppose, since it's used 24x7 to aid security on 
> > countless production servers, that security dwarfs testing.  Still, 
> > debugging, yes that's valid.
> > I don't suppose it makes and difference; whatever the purpose, a chroot 
> > that doesn't change the root is buggy.
> >     
> It does change the root, it just doesn't guarantee you can't change it
> back - which is correct POSIX, Unix, SuS behaviour. So either everyone
> else is wrong or you are.. I know who I am betting on
>   
Charming.  They really say that, do they?  Where?  I find no such thing, 
and I looked.  I did find Open Groups SuS which, similar to SCO's UNIX, 
says:
> The dot-dot entry in the root directory is interpreted to mean the 
> root directory itself. Thus, dot-dot cannot be used to access files 
> outside the subtree rooted at the root directory.
I feel I've presented a good case that that it's a bug.  You made a 
somewhat rude counter-claim, which I don't ascribe to malevolence.  
You're simply disinterested.  Nobody else cares, so why expend effort on 
it, right?  I'll let it drop, but it is a bug.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/