From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1426078AbcBRMAF (ORCPT ); Thu, 18 Feb 2016 07:00:05 -0500 Received: from cn.fujitsu.com ([59.151.112.132]:54939 "EHLO heian.cn.fujitsu.com" rhost-flags-OK-FAIL-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1424770AbcBRMAB convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Thu, 18 Feb 2016 07:00:01 -0500 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.20,346,1444665600"; d="scan'208";a="3678575" From: Zhao Lei To: "'Mateusz Guzik'" , "'Eric W. Biederman'" CC: , References: <20160216142608.GA16757@mguzik> <87k2m33xgj.fsf@x220.int.ebiederm.org> <20160217205407.GD16757@mguzik> In-Reply-To: <20160217205407.GD16757@mguzik> Subject: RE: [PATCH] Make core_pattern support namespace Date: Thu, 18 Feb 2016 19:59:48 +0800 Message-ID: <009601d16a43$de01fb80$9a05f280$@cn.fujitsu.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 15.0 Thread-Index: AQKbwJuK4Hx1gFTeVGCAwi56rA617AJNADErAYIccKcBqK71qp1xRhFQ Content-Language: zh-cn X-yoursite-MailScanner-ID: 5D2B042AC840.AC54D X-yoursite-MailScanner: Found to be clean X-yoursite-MailScanner-From: zhaolei@cn.fujitsu.com Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi, Mateusz Guzik > -----Original Message----- > From: Mateusz Guzik [mailto:mguzik@redhat.com] > Sent: Thursday, February 18, 2016 4:54 AM > To: Eric W. Biederman > Cc: Zhao Lei ; containers@lists.linux-foundation.org; > linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > Subject: Re: [PATCH] Make core_pattern support namespace > > On Wed, Feb 17, 2016 at 02:15:24PM -0600, Eric W. Biederman wrote: > > Mateusz Guzik writes: > > > On Tue, Feb 16, 2016 at 07:33:39PM +0800, Zhao Lei wrote: > > >> For container based on namespace design, it is good to allow > > >> each container keeping their own coredump setting. > > > > > > Sorry if this is a false alarm, I don't have easy means to test it, but > > > is not this an immediate privilege escalation? > > > > It is. This is why we do not currently have a per namespace setting. > > > > Thanks for confimation. > > > Solving the user mode helper problem is technically a fair amount of > > work, if not theoretically challenging. > > > > Well, I would say custom core_patterns without pipe support are still > better than none. > +1. > Say one would ensure a stable core_pattern (i.e. that it cannot be > modified as it is being parsed) and a restricted set of allowed > characters in the pattern (which would not include the pipe), validated > when one attempts to set the pattern. > > Does this sound acceptable? If so, and there are no counter ideas from > Lei, I can get around to that. > If we can let kernel select pipe_program in vm's filesystem, and run pipe_program with vm's filesystem, set a pipe for core_patterm in vm will be safe. What is your opinion on above solution? If above way is not acceptable, or impossible to realize, I also agree your solution of limit vm setting pipe. Thanks Zhaolei > -- > Mateusz Guzik