Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 18 Jun 2008 15:02:35 -0600
From:      James Gritton <jamie@gritton.org>
To:        freebsd-virtualization@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: V_* meta-symbols and locking
Message-ID:  <485977EB.90504@gritton.org>
In-Reply-To: <200806182156.37998.zec@icir.org>
References:  <48588595.7020709@gritton.org> <200806182140.23123.zec@icir.org> <4859661E.9070502@gritton.org> <200806182156.37998.zec@icir.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Marko Zec wrote:

 >>> The only thing I'd like to have
 >>> as an option is to be able to spawn a new process in the target VM
 >>> _without_ making it chrooted...
 >>
 >> If you mean creating a jail that's not chrooted, that's no problem.
 >> If you mean creating a jail that *is* chrooted, and then placing a
 >> process into that jail without chrooting it, that would be a breakage
 >> of the jail paradigm.  Hopefully you mean the former?
 >
 > No, I want the later, as an option.  Given that the parent environment /
 > jail completely controls the child anyhow, I don't think such an
 > (optional) behavior would be too big a security issue.

One thing you could do is keep a file descriptor open to the real root
directory, and call jail_attach().  As long as the system is in its
default state of chroot_allow_open_directories == 1, you can then
fchdir() or openat() from the saved descriptor.  That could easily be
made an option to jexec(8).

- Jamie



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?485977EB.90504>