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

From: Eric Van Hensbergen
Date: Wed Jun 22 2005 - 11:42:22 EST

On 6/22/05, Eric Van Hensbergen <ericvh@xxxxxxxxx> 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
(b) Enforce NODEV along with NOSUID so that user-based synthetics
can't have device inodes with compromised permissions, etc.

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at