From: ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman)
To: James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com>
Cc: Linux Containers <containers@lists.linux-foundation.org>,
util-linux@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: bind mounting namespace inodes for unprivileged users
Date: Wed, 04 May 2016 09:38:03 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87oa8lc2ic.fsf@x220.int.ebiederm.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1462299656.16133.51.camel@HansenPartnership.com> (James Bottomley's message of "Tue, 03 May 2016 14:20:56 -0400")
James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com> writes:
> Right at the moment, unprivileged users cannot call mount --bind to
> create a permanent copy of any of their namespaces. This is annoying
> because it means that for entry to long running containers you have to
> spawn an undying process and use nsenter via the /proc/<pid>/ns files.
>
> The first question is: assuming we restrict it to bind mounting only
> nsfs inodes, is there any reason an unprivileged user shouldn't be able
> to bind a namespace they've created to a file they own in the initial
> mount namespace?
Own, have read/write and unlink privileges.
My big concern would be the fact that a bind mount today makes a file
immune from unlink. So it would mess up rm -rf.
That might not be worse than what a setuid fuse mount binary allows
today.
I wonder if there might is a way to setup a
user namespace and mount namespace combination so users could manage
mounts in their own login shells, just like is allowed in plan 9.
Long term I think that would be more satisfactory.
> So, does anyone have any strong (or even weak) opinions about this
> before I start coding patches?
The mount namespace is complex and getting it right is a pain in the
rear. So adding yet another path and piece in to the existing
complexity makes me cringe a little.
Eric
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-05-04 14:48 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-05-03 18:20 bind mounting namespace inodes for unprivileged users James Bottomley
2016-05-03 21:22 ` Serge Hallyn
2016-05-04 11:15 ` James Bottomley
2016-05-04 8:44 ` Karel Zak
2016-05-04 13:16 ` James Bottomley
2016-05-04 14:38 ` Eric W. Biederman [this message]
2016-05-04 17:28 ` James Bottomley
2016-05-04 17:43 ` Eric W. Biederman
2016-05-04 18:00 ` James Bottomley
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=87oa8lc2ic.fsf@x220.int.ebiederm.org \
--to=ebiederm@xmission.com \
--cc=James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com \
--cc=containers@lists.linux-foundation.org \
--cc=util-linux@vger.kernel.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