Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751457AbWC3Cty (ORCPT ); Wed, 29 Mar 2006 21:49:54 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751463AbWC3Cty (ORCPT ); Wed, 29 Mar 2006 21:49:54 -0500 Received: from ebiederm.dsl.xmission.com ([166.70.28.69]:51118 "EHLO ebiederm.dsl.xmission.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751457AbWC3Ctx (ORCPT ); Wed, 29 Mar 2006 21:49:53 -0500 To: Chris Wright Cc: Sam Vilain , Nick Piggin , Herbert Poetzl , Bill Davidsen , Linux Kernel ML , "Serge E. Hallyn" Subject: Re: [RFC] Virtualization steps References: <20060328085206.GA14089@MAIL.13thfloor.at> <4428FB29.8020402@yahoo.com.au> <20060328142639.GE14576@MAIL.13thfloor.at> <44294BE4.2030409@yahoo.com.au> <442A26E9.20608@vilain.net> <20060329182027.GB14724@sorel.sous-sol.org> <442B0BFE.9080709@vilain.net> <20060329225241.GO15997@sorel.sous-sol.org> <20060330013618.GS15997@sorel.sous-sol.org> From: ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman) Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2006 19:48:15 -0700 In-Reply-To: <20060330013618.GS15997@sorel.sous-sol.org> (Chris Wright's message of "Wed, 29 Mar 2006 17:36:18 -0800") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.1007 (Gnus v5.10.7) Emacs/21.4 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1640 Lines: 40 Chris Wright writes: >> At least one implementation Linux Jails by Serge E. Hallyn was done completely >> with security modules, and the code was pretty minimal. > > Yes, although the networking area was something that looked better done > via namespaces (at least that's my recollection of my conversations with > Serge on that one a few years back). For general networking yes the namespace flavor seems to be the sane way to do it. As I currently understand the problem everything goes along nicely nothing really special needed until you start asking the question how do I implement a root user with uid 0 who does not own the machine. When you start asking that question is when the creepy crawlies come out. On most virtual filesystems the default owner of files is uid 0. Additional privilege checks are not applied. Writing to those files could potentially have global effect. It is completely unclear how permissions checks should work between two processes in different uid namespaces. Especially there are cases where you do want interactions. If every guest/container/jail is configured so the uids with the same value mean the same user there are no security issues even when they interact because the isolation is not perfect. So my gut feel it to postpone a bunch of these problems and say making uids non-global is a security module issue. Eric - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/