From: Chris Wright <chrisw@osdl.org>
To: Chris Wright <chrisw@osdl.org>, Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>,
torvalds@osdl.org, greg@kroah.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
vserver@solucorp.qc.ca
Subject: Re: sys_vserver
Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2003 14:16:54 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20031001141654.N14398@osdlab.pdx.osdl.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20031001194747.GA24632@DUK2.13thfloor.at>; from herbert@13thfloor.at on Wed, Oct 01, 2003 at 09:47:47PM +0200
* Herbert Poetzl (herbert@13thfloor.at) wrote:
>
> one of the advantages the current _and_ future vserver project
> has over 'changing/setting some features for a process' is the
> concept of a context layer, residing between kernel and processes
> _belonging_ to a context ...
Yes, I agree, this is a useful abstraction.
> you could, for example set up a context which allows a maximum
> of 10 processes, limited to one ethernet interface, using it's
> own root/user quota, start some 'virtual' server in this context
> doing all this init stuff, and then visit this context from
> outside, via a simple 'context' change ... if you've got the
> right capabilities/permissions ...
>
> I can not imagine how you would do that with the /proc/<pid>/attr/
> interface, but I'm sure you can explain it to me ...
Put it this way, typical security modules have a notion of a
context, and the ability to grant/deny actions base on the context.
The /proc/<pid>/attr interface is how you can set/retrieve the context
per process, and subsequent fork/exec's can chose how to propagate
that context. I believe a reasonable portion of vserver can become a
security module, but there would clearly remain a need for some of the
virtualization (e.g. hostname, etc.).
thanks,
-chris
--
Linux Security Modules http://lsm.immunix.org http://lsm.bkbits.net
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-10-01 21:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-10-01 18:51 sys_vserver Chris Wright
2003-10-01 18:58 ` sys_vserver Rik van Riel
2003-10-01 19:15 ` sys_vserver Chris Wright
2003-10-01 19:21 ` sys_vserver Rik van Riel
2003-10-01 19:47 ` sys_vserver Herbert Poetzl
2003-10-01 21:16 ` Chris Wright [this message]
2003-10-01 21:44 ` sys_vserver Rik van Riel
2003-10-01 22:57 ` sys_vserver James Morris
2003-10-01 23:14 ` sys_vserver Chris Wright
2003-10-01 23:17 ` sys_vserver Rik van Riel
2003-10-01 23:32 ` sys_vserver Chris Wright
2003-10-01 23:22 ` sys_vserver Linus Torvalds
2003-10-01 23:28 ` sys_vserver Rik van Riel
2003-10-01 22:52 ` [vserver] sys_vserver Herbert Poetzl
2003-10-01 23:05 ` Chris Wright
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20031001141654.N14398@osdlab.pdx.osdl.net \
--to=chrisw@osdl.org \
--cc=greg@kroah.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=riel@redhat.com \
--cc=torvalds@osdl.org \
--cc=vserver@solucorp.qc.ca \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®