"Theodore Y. Ts'o" <tytso@xxxxxxx> writes: > On Thu, May 24, 2018 at 10:49:31AM +1000, Dave Chinner wrote: >> User automounting of removable storage should be done via a >> privilege separation mechanism and hence avoid this whole class of >> security problems. We can get this separation by using FUSE in these >> situations, right? > > FUSE is a pretty terrible security boundary. And not all file systems > have FUSE support. As I had suggested earlier, probably better to use > 9P, and mount the file system in a VM. I just have to ask. Why do you find FUSE to be a pretty terrible security boundary? My experience with kernel's 9P implemenation is that it is scarier to deal with, and that 9P is starting to suffer the maladies of an unmaintained filesystem (which it is). FUSE was always written with the assumption that it would be attacked by malicious users and generally appears robust against that kind of thing. The whole internet accessibleness of 9P while making it usable in VM's generally looks like down-side as it adds a the whole issue of malicious packets from a 3rd party that is neither client nor server to deal with. Eric -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-xfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
