From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Feb 14 14:58:54 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: fs@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.FreeBSD.org [8.8.178.115]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 261EB856; Thu, 14 Feb 2013 14:58:54 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jamie@FreeBSD.org) Received: from m2.gritton.org (gritton.org [199.192.164.235]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ED98698D; Thu, 14 Feb 2013 14:58:53 +0000 (UTC) Received: from glorfindel.gritton.org (c-174-52-130-157.hsd1.ut.comcast.net [174.52.130.157]) (authenticated bits=0) by m2.gritton.org (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id r1EEwqeL094374; Thu, 14 Feb 2013 07:58:53 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from jamie@FreeBSD.org) Message-ID: <511CFBAC.3000803@FreeBSD.org> Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2013 07:58:52 -0700 From: Jamie Gritton User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; FreeBSD amd64; en-US; rv:1.9.2.24) Gecko/20120129 Thunderbird/3.1.16 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Baptiste Daroussin Subject: Re: Marking some FS as jailable References: <20130212194047.GE12760@ithaqua.etoilebsd.net> <511B1F55.3080500@FreeBSD.org> <20130214132715.GG44004@ithaqua.etoilebsd.net> <511CF77A.2080005@FreeBSD.org> <20130214145600.GI44004@ithaqua.etoilebsd.net> In-Reply-To: <20130214145600.GI44004@ithaqua.etoilebsd.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: jail@FreeBSD.org, fs@FreeBSD.org X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2013 14:58:54 -0000 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