UNIX domain sockets on nullfs still broken?
rwatson at FreeBSD.org
Thu Dec 10 09:44:38 UTC 2009
On Tue, 1 Dec 2009, Linda Messerschmidt wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 30, 2009 at 10:14 AM, Ivan Voras <ivoras at freebsd.org> wrote:
>>> What's the sane solution, then, when the only method of communication
>>> is unix domain sockets?
>> It is a security problem. I think the long-term solution would be to add a
>> sysctl analogous to security.jail.param.securelevel to handle this.
> Out of curiosity, why is allowing accessing to a Unix domain socket in a
> filesystem to which a jail has explicitly been allowed access more or less
> secure than allowing access to a file or a devfs node in a filesystem to
> which a jail has explicitly been allowed access?
(I seem to have caught this thread rather late in the game due to being on
travel) -- Ivan is wrong about nullfs, it's broken due to a bug, not a
feature, and that bug is not present when using a single file system. He's
thinking of unionfs semantics, where if it worked it would be a bug. :-)
Robert N M Watson
University of Cambridge
More information about the freebsd-hackers