Re: [9fans] bug in exportfs

[Bruce Ellis <bruce.ellis@gmail.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1265 bytes --]

an alternative is just to have an exclude file listing files/directories
that cannot be read or walked to.

brucee

On 15 February 2016 at 12:05, arisawa <arisawa@ar.aichi-u.ac.jp> wrote:

> Hello,
>
> > 2016/02/15 7:57、Charles Forsyth <charles.forsyth@gmail.com> のメール：
> >
> >
> > On 14 February 2016 at 16:38, <cinap_lenrek@felloff.net> wrote:
> > i could imagine the filtering being usefull when cpu'ing to foreign
> machines,
> > as a server can easily compromize your system when cpu exports your whole
> > local namespace
> >
> > You'd still be better off using a custom nsfile to control it, running
> that cpu in
> > a more restricted name space from the start, so leaks are impossible.
>
> filtering of exportfs is handy if it works well.
> for example, assume we want to exclude all files of name that begins with
> “.”,
> then it is probably difficult to do so using only nsfile.
>
> the “+” filtering is almost useless.
> it will not be difficult to rewrite the current code so that we have
> better matching rule.
> (I think ordering of pattern sequence should be used in evaluation.)
> however the change may break something others.
> (but I doubt the “+” filtering is really used)
>
>
>
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1798 bytes --]