Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: > On Fri, Dec 22, 2017 at 3:32 PM, Dongsu Park <dongsu@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> From: Seth Forshee <seth.forshee@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> >> >> The user in control of a super block should be allowed to freeze >> and thaw it. Relax the restrictions on the FIFREEZE and FITHAW >> ioctls to require CAP_SYS_ADMIN in s_user_ns. > > Why is this required for unprivileged fuse? > > Fuse doesn't support freeze, so this seems to make no sense in the > context of this patchset. This isn't required to support fuse. It is a relaxation in permissions so it isn't strictly necessary for anything. Until just recently Seth and I work working through the vfs looking at what we need in general for unprivileged mounts. With fuse as our focus but we were not limiting ourselves to fuse. I have been putting off relaxation of permissions like this because they are not necessary for safety. But in general they do make sense. In practice I think all we need to worry about for fuse is the last 4 patches. Eric _______________________________________________ Containers mailing list Containers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers
