From: Linas Vepstas <linasvepstas@gmail.com>
To: Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com>
Cc: Amir Goldstein <amir73il@gmail.com>,
Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu>,
linux-unionfs@vger.kernel.org,
linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
Seth Forshee <seth.forshee@canonical.com>,
"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>
Subject: Re: LXC+overlayfs in unprivileged mode
Date: Tue, 3 Jan 2017 10:08:25 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAHrUA37+RWKXNCLuoyDufg+g3-TG5bLgSa_XwK5htmvb-omCcw@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170103134806.GA29807@redhat.com>
On Tue, Jan 3, 2017 at 7:48 AM, Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com> wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 01, 2017 at 02:32:20PM -0600, Linas Vepstas wrote:
>
> [..]
>> It's somehow ironic that the push for user-space mounts and containers
>> comes from this general fuzzy sensation that they are somehow "safer",
>> yet the changes to enable this provide a new attack surface for
>> privilege escalation. Funny world we live in. :-) Happy New Year!
>
> Only if unprivileged users want to be able to mount overlayfs. Otherwise, a
> privileged user can just mount overlayfs on host and bind mount that
> inside container (this is what docker does). And then you don't have
> to worry about allowing unprivileged users to be able to allow mounting.
:-( The way that Ubuntu solves this is to carry patches to allow user-space
mounts. Debian doesn't, which is how I tripped across this. Anyway, Docker
and LXC are very different beasts: Docker makes for great demos, and
can get the occasional newbie going, but is kind of klunky and awkward
in real-life deployments. It certainly fails to provide the ease-of-use and
flexibility that LXC offers. (Docker tries to solve two unrelated problems,
and it handles both of them poorly: one problem is containerization, the
other problem is container build. LXC solves the first problem much more
elegantly, and completely ignores the second problem, which, in general,
is easily solved with shell scripts, so what was the point of Docker
reinventing a new kind of shell, badly?)
-- linas
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-01-03 16:08 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-12-31 17:42 LXC+overlayfs in unprivileged mode Linas Vepstas
2017-01-01 8:51 ` Amir Goldstein
2017-01-01 20:32 ` Linas Vepstas
2017-01-03 13:48 ` Vivek Goyal
2017-01-03 16:08 ` Linas Vepstas [this message]
2017-01-04 13:49 ` Vivek Goyal
2017-01-03 23:47 ` Eric W. Biederman
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=CAHrUA37+RWKXNCLuoyDufg+g3-TG5bLgSa_XwK5htmvb-omCcw@mail.gmail.com \
--to=linasvepstas@gmail.com \
--cc=amir73il@gmail.com \
--cc=ebiederm@xmission.com \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-unionfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=miklos@szeredi.hu \
--cc=seth.forshee@canonical.com \
--cc=vgoyal@redhat.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).