Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 18 Feb 2013 17:29:56 +0100
From:      Mateusz Guzik <mjguzik@gmail.com>
To:        Jamie Gritton <jamie@FreeBSD.org>
Cc:        Harald Schmalzbauer <h.schmalzbauer@omnilan.de>, freebsd-stable <freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.org>, freebsd-jail <jail@FreeBSD.org>
Subject:   Re: new jail(8) ignoring devfs_ruleset?
Message-ID:  <20130218162956.GA1834@dft-labs.eu>
In-Reply-To: <51225642.2010501@FreeBSD.org>
References:  <511E61F5.1000805@omnilan.de> <511EC759.4060704@FreeBSD.org> <5121EC52.5040502@omnilan.de> <51225642.2010501@FreeBSD.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, Feb 18, 2013 at 09:26:42AM -0700, Jamie Gritton wrote:
> On 02/18/13 01:54, Harald Schmalzbauer wrote:
> >  schrieb Jamie Gritton am 16.02.2013 00:40 (localtime):
> >>On 02/15/13 09:27, Harald Schmalzbauer wrote:
> >>>   Hello,
> >>>
> >>>like already posted, on 9.1-R, I highly appreciate the new jail(8) and
> >>>jail.conf capabilities. Thanks for that extension!
> >>>
> >>>Accidentally I saw that "devfs_ruleset" seems to be ignored.
> >>>If I list /dev/ I see all the hosts disk devices etc.
> >>>I set "devfs_ruleset = 4;" and "enforce_statfs = 1;" in jail.conf.
> >>>    Inside the jail,
> >>>sysctl security.jail.devfs_ruleset returnes "1".
> >>>But like mentioned, I can access all devices...
> >>>
> >>>Thanks for any help,
> >>>
> >>>-Harry
> >>
> >>devfs_ruleset is only used along with mount.devfs - do you also have
> >>that set in jail.conf?
> >
> >Thanks for your response.
> >
> >Yes, I have mount.devfs; set.
> >Otherwise I wouldn't have any device inside my jail. Verified - and like
> >intended, right?
> >Another notable discrepancy: The man page tells that devfs_rulset is "4"
> >by default.
> >But when I don't set devfs_rulset in jail.conf at all, inside the jail,
> >'sysctl security.jail.devfs_ruleset': 0
> >When set, like mentioned above, it returns the corresponding value, but
> >it doesn't have any effect.
> >How gets devfs_rulset handled? Does jail(8) do the whole job? I'd like
> >to help finding the source, but have missed the whole new jail evolution...
> >Inside my jails, I don't have a fstab, outside I have them defined and
> >enabled with "mount" - and noticed the non-reverted umounting.
> 
> I found the problem - I noticed you mentioned 9.1-R, and took a look at
> devfs(5). On CURRENT, there's a mount option "ruleset", that isn't there
> on 9.
> 
> So I'll have to get around it by running devfs(8) after the mount. I'll
> work on a patch for that.
> 

Why not MFC support for that mount option instead?

-- 
Mateusz Guzik <mjguzik gmail.com>



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20130218162956.GA1834>