From: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
To: Jamie Lokier <jamie@shareable.org>
Cc: Naphtali Sprei <nsprei@redhat.com>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>,
qemu-devel@nongnu.org
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] A different way to ask for readonly drive
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 2009 15:23:18 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4B2A3ED6.40908@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20091217131635.GA24967@shareable.org>
Am 17.12.2009 14:16, schrieb Jamie Lokier:
> Christoph Hellwig wrote:
>> On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 06:45:01PM +0000, Jamie Lokier wrote:
>>> access=rw
>>> access=ro
>>> access=auto (default)
>>
>> Yes, that sounds like the least clumsy one. I still think the current
>> implementation is a very bad default, though.
>
> Without agreeing or disagreeing over whether it's a bad default :), a
> usability problem occurs with the current implementation when you
> deliberately "chmod 444" an image to have high confidence that it's
> opened read only: When running as root, file permissions are ignored
> (except sometimes on NFS).
>
> For that reason I use "chattr +i" on all my read-only image files, to
> really make sure that no qemu invocation mistake could accidentally
> corrupt valuable images. That works, but it's not very convenient.
>
> If the "auto" method is kept, I think it would be an improvement if it
> checks the file permission itself, and does not even try to open a
> file O_RDWR if there are no writable permission bits - so that "chmod
> 444" has the same "open as read only" effect when qemu is invoked as root.
I don't think that this makes sense. That you can write the file as root
is a feature of your OS and qemu has nothing to do with it. Doing
anything else than accessing it would actually be unexpected behaviour
on this OS. We're just writing an application, not a better OS.
You can decide to protect your images with the qemu readonly option and
get the protection that qemu defines, or you take the permissions of the
OS and get from the OS whatever the definition of that protection is
(including write access for root). qemu can't and shouldn't know that
you use the OS's protection but actually don't quite mean what it's
defined to be.
Kevin
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-12-17 14:24 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-12-14 13:35 [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] A different way to ask for readonly drive Naphtali Sprei
2009-12-14 15:53 ` Stefan Weil
2009-12-15 18:45 ` Jamie Lokier
2009-12-15 22:09 ` Stefan Weil
2009-12-17 10:50 ` Christoph Hellwig
2009-12-17 13:16 ` Jamie Lokier
2009-12-17 14:23 ` Kevin Wolf [this message]
2009-12-17 15:30 ` Jamie Lokier
2009-12-17 14:31 ` Markus Armbruster
2009-12-15 17:45 ` Kevin Wolf
2009-12-17 11:31 ` Richard W.M. Jones
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=4B2A3ED6.40908@redhat.com \
--to=kwolf@redhat.com \
--cc=hch@lst.de \
--cc=jamie@shareable.org \
--cc=nsprei@redhat.com \
--cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
/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).