Date: Sun, 05 May 2013 02:00:16 +0100 From: Jase Thew <jase@FreeBSD.org> To: Baptiste Daroussin <bapt@FreeBSD.org> Cc: jail@FreeBSD.org, fs@FreeBSD.org, Jamie Gritton <jamie@FreeBSD.org> Subject: Re: Marking some FS as jailable Message-ID: <5185AF20.5010308@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <20130214150857.GK44004@ithaqua.etoilebsd.net> References: <20130212194047.GE12760@ithaqua.etoilebsd.net> <511B1F55.3080500@FreeBSD.org> <20130214132715.GG44004@ithaqua.etoilebsd.net> <511CF77A.2080005@FreeBSD.org> <20130214145600.GI44004@ithaqua.etoilebsd.net> <511CFBAC.3000803@FreeBSD.org> <20130214150857.GK44004@ithaqua.etoilebsd.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 14/02/2013 15:08, Baptiste Daroussin wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 14, 2013 at 07:58:52AM -0700, Jamie Gritton wrote:
>> On 02/14/13 07:56, Baptiste Daroussin wrote:
>>> On Thu, Feb 14, 2013 at 07:40:58AM -0700, Jamie Gritton wrote:
>>>> On 02/14/13 06:27, Baptiste Daroussin wrote:
>>>>> On Tue, Feb 12, 2013 at 10:06:29PM -0700, Jamie Gritton wrote:
>>>>>> On 02/12/13 12:40, Baptiste Daroussin wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I would like to mark some filesystem as jailable, here is the one I need:
>>>>>>> linprocfs, tmpfs and fdescfs, I was planning to do it with adding a
>>>>>>> allow.mount.${fs} for each one.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Anyone has an objection?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Would it make sense for linprocfs to use the existing allow.mount.procfs
>>>>>> flag?
>>>>>
>>>>> Here is a patch that uses allow.mount.procfs for linsysfs and linprocfs.
>>>>>
>>>>> It also addd a new allow.mount.tmpfs to allow tmpfs.
>>>>>
>>>>> It seems to work here, can anyone confirm this is the right way to do it?
>>>>>
>>>>> I'll commit in 2 parts: first lin*fs, second tmpfs related things
>>>>>
>>>>> http://people.freebsd.org/~bapt/jail-fs.diff
>>>>
>>>> There are some problems. The usage on the mount side of things looks
>>>> correct, but it needs more on the jail side. I'm including a patch just
>>>> of that part, with a correction in jail.h and further changes in kern_jail.c
>>>
>>> Thank you the patch has been updated with your fixes.
>>
>> One more bit (literally): PR_ALLOW_ALL in sys/jail.h needs updating.
>>
>> - Jamie
>
> Fixed thanks
>
> Bapt
>
Hi,
Is this functionality likely to make its way into HEAD and if so, do you
have any idea as to the timescale?
Regards,
Jase.
--
Jase Thew
jase@FreeBSD.org
FreeBSD Ports Committer
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?5185AF20.5010308>