From owner-freebsd-stable Mon Mar 12 6:44:19 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from dire.bris.ac.uk (dire.bris.ac.uk [137.222.10.60]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2AE9437B71A for ; Mon, 12 Mar 2001 06:44:14 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from Jan.Grant@bristol.ac.uk) Received: from mail.ilrt.bris.ac.uk by dire.bris.ac.uk with SMTP-PRIV with ESMTP; Mon, 12 Mar 2001 14:43:58 +0000 Received: from cmjg (helo=localhost) by mail.ilrt.bris.ac.uk with local-esmtp (Exim 3.16 #1) id 14cTWT-0007Nt-00; Mon, 12 Mar 2001 14:42:09 +0000 Date: Mon, 12 Mar 2001 14:42:09 +0000 (GMT) From: Jan Grant To: Steve Tremblett Cc: freebsd-stable Subject: Re: nullfs et al In-Reply-To: <200103121327.IAA25065@sjt-u10.cisco.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Mon, 12 Mar 2001, Steve Tremblett wrote: > +--- Oliver Fromme wrote: > | > | Hi, > | > | What is the "proper" way to mount binaries etc. into a > | bunch of jail homes? Obviously, I don't want to copy > | /bin, /usr/bin, /usr/lib etc. for every jailed user. > | BTW, I'm using 4-stable. > | > | I've grepped the lists and found the following possible > | solutions: > | > | (A) Local NFS loopback mounts. Seems to work reliably. > | Is this the best way? Somehow it is my impression > | that the NFS causes some overhead and might cause > | some performance impact. Any opinions? > | BTW, this particular machine doesn't use any NFS > | otherwise (neither client nor server). > > An alternative to this could be symlinks. In a chroot()ed environment, > the user should see symlinks OUT of the jail as the actual files. > > Populate /usr/local/jail/bin, /usr/local/jail/usr/bin... with whatever > you want, and then just link /chroot/path/bin -> /usr/jail/bin... > > Then you eliminate the NFS overhead, but now links are eating all your > inodes... I don't think this does what you think it does. If it _does_ work, then jail is so badly fragged that I'm surprised nobody has screamed yet. Absolute symlinks should be interpreted relative to chroot; relative symlinks containing "../../../../.." should see chroot as the ceiling. -- jan grant, ILRT, University of Bristol. http://www.ilrt.bris.ac.uk/ Tel +44(0)117 9287163 Fax +44 (0)117 9287112 RFC822 jan.grant@bris.ac.uk Goedel would be proud - I'm both inconsistent _and_ incomplete. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message