Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 07 Jun 2017 07:04:34 -0400
From:      Allan Jude <allanjude@FreeBSD.org>
To:        Alexander Leidinger <Alexander@leidinger.net>
Cc:        src-committers@freebsd.org, svn-src-all@freebsd.org, svn-src-head@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: svn commit: r319611 - in head: sys/kern sys/sys usr.sbin/jail
Message-ID:  <6949814E-4CA8-42AC-A4D4-8FE3680E3051@FreeBSD.org>
In-Reply-To: <20170607102033.Horde.fNxJ0jaYva0yGHTMA77wPTz@webmail.leidinger.net>
References:  <20170607102033.Horde.fNxJ0jaYva0yGHTMA77wPTz@webmail.leidinger.net>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On June 7, 2017 4:20:33 AM EDT, Alexander Leidinger <Alexander@leidinger=2E=
net> wrote:
>
>Quoting Allan Jude <allanjude@freebsd=2Eorg> (from Tue, 6 Jun 2017 =20
>02:15:01 +0000 (UTC)):
>
>> Author: allanjude
>> Date: Tue Jun  6 02:15:00 2017
>> New Revision: 319611
>> URL: https://svnweb=2Efreebsd=2Eorg/changeset/base/319611
>>
>> Log:
>>   Jails: Optionally prevent jailed root from binding to privileged
>ports
>>
>>   You may now optionally specify allow=2Enoreserved_ports to prevent
>root
>>   inside a jail from using privileged ports (less than 1024)
>
>What about a different name than "noreserved_ports"? This is very =20
>close to "nonreserverd_ports", and as such it's easy to get wrong the =20
>first time=2E IMO "block_reserved_ports" and "noblock_reserved_ports" =20
>(or another similar explicit wording) is less likely to get =20
>misunderstood (please take potential lack of language learning skills =20
>into account=2E=2E=2E)=2E
>
>> Modified: head/sys/kern/kern_jail=2Ec
>>
>=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D
>> --- head/sys/kern/kern_jail=2Ec	Tue Jun  6 02:03:22 2017	(r319610)
>> +++ head/sys/kern/kern_jail=2Ec	Tue Jun  6 02:15:00 2017	(r319611)
>> @@ -199,6 +199,7 @@ static char *pr_allow_names[] =3D {
>>  	"allow=2Emount=2Efdescfs",
>>  	"allow=2Emount=2Elinprocfs",
>>  	"allow=2Emount=2Elinsysfs",
>> +	"allow=2Ereserved_ports",
>>  };
>>  const size_t pr_allow_names_size =3D sizeof(pr_allow_names);
>>
>> @@ -218,10 +219,11 @@ static char *pr_allow_nonames[] =3D {
>>  	"allow=2Emount=2Enofdescfs",
>>  	"allow=2Emount=2Enolinprocfs",
>>  	"allow=2Emount=2Enolinsysfs",
>> +	"allow=2Enoreserved_ports",
>
>Bye,
>Alexander=2E

The option name is reserved_ports which allows root to bind to the ports=
=2E As with all jail options, the no prefix disables it=2E This feature is =
on by default for backwards compatibility=2E
--=20
Allan Jude



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?6949814E-4CA8-42AC-A4D4-8FE3680E3051>