Re: [patch] PID namespace design bug, workaround

[Pavel Emelyanov]

Ulrich Drepper wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> 
> Pavel Emelyanov wrote:
>> Having access to the same IPCs in different pid namespaces won't work.
>> Having access to the same filesystem in different IPC namespaces won't work.
>> Having access to the same UID namespace in different VFS namespaces won't work.
>> Having access to the same <any> namespace in different <many others> namespace
>>  wont' work.
>> [...]
> 
> 
> Then explicitly prevent the cases which cannot work in the clone()
> calls.  Yes, giving people rope to shoot themselves is a Unix tradition
> but it's so unnecessary in this case and will only cause support
> problems for innocent people.

:)

> I bet the result will be that if you have a separate PID namespace you
> need to enforce every other namespace as well.  There are simply too
> many dependencies.

I think, that Ted's proposal (about the "namespaces compatibility matrix") is 
better. I'd prefer knowing of what can stop working in case I do something
rather that forcedly having my hands off this.

Thanks,
Pavel
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/