tech-kern archive
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Old Index]
Re: core statement on fexecve, O_EXEC, and O_SEARCH
On Wed, Dec 05, 2012 at 04:03:40PM -0500, Mouse wrote:
> >> * whether the name in question is within the process' current
> >> root (forbidding fchdir and fchroot otherwise).
> > Definitely.
>
> I'm actually not convinced this is so obviously a good thing.
>
> I see an analogy between root directories and UIDs. We have chroot(),
> and we have setuid() - but we also have setreuid(). I can see
> potential use for chroot-hopping between multiple directories.
>
> I'm not sure NetBSD should support that. But I'm not sure it should
> forbid it, either. I'm not sure how I'd design an interface for it,
> but it might be worth thinking about when implementing whatever NetBSD
> eventually decides on.
Well, let me refine what I said: this should be part of the
permissions scheme for capability passing.
--
David A. Holland
dholland%netbsd.org@localhost
- References:
- Re: core statement on fexecve, O_EXEC, and O_SEARCH
- core statement on fexecve, O_EXEC, and O_SEARCH
- Re: core statement on fexecve, O_EXEC, and O_SEARCH
- Re: core statement on fexecve, O_EXEC, and O_SEARCH
- Re: core statement on fexecve, O_EXEC, and O_SEARCH
- Re: core statement on fexecve, O_EXEC, and O_SEARCH
- From: Thor Lancelot Simon
- Re: core statement on fexecve, O_EXEC, and O_SEARCH
- Re: core statement on fexecve, O_EXEC, and O_SEARCH
Home |
Main Index |
Thread Index |
Old Index