From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Alexander Viro <viro@math.psu.edu>
To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu
Subject: Re: [9fans] Private Namespaces for Linux
In-Reply-To: <20011120225405.6E1E219A77@mail.cse.psu.edu>
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.4.21.0111201829240.23604-100000@weyl.math.psu.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2001 18:31:56 -0500
Topicbox-Message-UUID: 25d9d3d2-eaca-11e9-9e20-41e7f4b1d025



On Tue, 20 Nov 2001, David Gordon Hogan wrote:

> > set-uid is stupid. So I don't allow it.
>
> Plan 9 doesn't even have set-uid.
>
> But I think you misunderstand.  There are two problems to
> be addressed: (1) rogue fileservers serving up set-uid files
> (not a problem for 9P, but relevant to Unix-based protocols
> like NFS...);

Nosuid.

> (2) attacks like the following:
>
> 	$ bind /tmp/passwd /etc/passwd
> 	$ su
>
> Disallowing su, passwd, sendmail, etc etc isn't really a solution...

Sure, but there are ways to handle that.  And until it's done we need
restricted mount.