Re: [ANN] unionfs patchset-13 release
- From: Daichi GOTO <daichi@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 01 Jun 2006 16:54:14 +0900
André Braga wrote:
A post scriptum to the original message:
The buggy behaviour won't affect the host system, but the jail could
well be compromised. I also have this feeling that ACLs also aren't
respected inside jails or can be overwritten as easily as shown below
Thanks,
André
for all folks who have deep consideration of FS:
We do not know well around MAC and ACL. Someone knows
well around those, please teach us. Does MAC have
a information of schg of chflags?
for all folks who have deep consideration of FS: part2
Yeah, it is possible to make capability for setting the
ALC and MAC information to the upper layer of the unionfs.
With that, we must consider the policy that what
information should be copied to shadow file when it makes
shadow file. Without the policy, we cannot make it.
We want to know your opinions if you have deep
consideration of it. What do you make of it?
--
Daichi GOTO, http://people.freebsd.org/~daichi
_______________________________________________
freebsd-current@xxxxxxxxxxx mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxx"
- Prev by Date: Re: Freeze due to performance_cx_lowest=LOW
- Next by Date: Re: md /tmp and async mounts
- Previous by thread: Re: Freeze due to performance_cx_lowest=LOW
- Next by thread: Re: [ANN] unionfs patchset-13 release
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
