Re: -mm -> 2.6.13 merge status (fuse)

Eric Van Hensbergen
2005-06-22T16:37:24Z

On 6/22/05, Eric Van Hensbergen <ericvh@gmail.com> wrote:
...
>
> If you combine these two restrictions with only allowing unprivileged
> mounts in private name space I think you get 90% there. The only
> thing left to resolve is the best way to allow sharing private name
> spaces between threads/users -- and I still view this as more of
> extended functionality than a hard-requirement.
>

Reviewing my notes, there were a few subtle restrictions I forgot
(most of which originally suggested by Miklos):

(a) User's can't mount file system types not deemed "safe" (via flag
in the file system type) -- this should help mitigate user's
exploiting bugs in existing file systems to interfere with the system.
Judging when a file system type is "safe" is a nasty kettle of fish
though...
(b) Enforce NODEV along with NOSUID so that user-based synthetics
can't have device inodes with compromised permissions, etc.

-eric