OpenVZ Forum


Home » Mailing lists » Devel » [RFC][PATCH 0/15] Pid namespaces
Re: [PATCH 11/15] Signal semantics [message #15478 is a reply to message #15410] Wed, 01 August 2007 16:13 Go to previous messageGo to previous message
serue is currently offline  serue
Messages: 750
Registered: February 2006
Senior Member
Quoting Pavel Emelyanov (xemul@openvz.org):
> [snip]
> 
> >>| Maybe it's worth disabling cross-namespaces ptracing...
> >>
> >>I think so too. Its probably not a serious limitation ?
> >
> >Several people think we will implement 'namespace entering' through a
> >ptrace hack, where maybe the admin ptraces the init in a child pidns,
> 
> Why not implement namespace entering w/o any hacks? :)

I did, as a patch on top of the nsproxy container subsystem.  The
response was that that is a hack, and ptrace is cleaner  :)

So the current options for namespace entering would be:

	* using Cedric's bind_ns() functionality, which assigns an
	  integer global id to a namespace, and allows a process to
	  enter a namespace by that global id
	* using my nsproxy container subsystem patch, which lets
	  a process enter another namespace using
	  	echo pid > /container/some/cont/directory/tasks
	  and eventually might allow construction of custom
	  namespaces, i.e.
	  	mkdir /container/c1/c2
		ln -s /container/c1/c1/network /container/c1/c2/network
		echo $$ > /container/c1/c2/tasks
	* using ptrace to coerce a process in the target namespace
	  into forking and executing the desired program.

> >makes it fork, and makes the child execute what it wants (i.e. ps -ef).
> >
> >You're talking about killing that functionality?
> 
> No. We're talking about disabling the things that are not supposed 
> to work at all.

Uh, well in the abstract that sounds like a sound policy...

-serge
 
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Previous Topic: Re: [RFC, PATCH] handle the multi-threaded init's exit() properly
Next Topic: [PATCH 0/14] sysfs cleanups
Goto Forum:
  


Current Time: Sat Sep 06 16:17:32 GMT 2025

Total time taken to generate the page: 0.11270 seconds