On Thu, Aug 01, 2013 at 09:28:52AM +1000, Dave Chinner wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 08:25:23AM -0500, Ben Myers wrote:
> > Hey,
> > On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 10:21:19AM +1000, Dave Chinner wrote:
> > > On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 06:40:21PM -0500, Ben Myers wrote:
> > > > On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 11:07:09PM -0400, Dwight Engen wrote:
> > > > > >From e6a9ee0cfa0ed40484f66bc1726dc19de36038b8 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00
> > > > > >2001
> > > > > From: Dwight Engen <dwight.engen@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > > Date: Tue, 2 Jul 2013 09:52:54 -0400
> > > > > Subject: [PATCH 7/7] enable building user namespace with xfs
> > > > >
> > > > > Signed-off-by: Dwight Engen <dwight.engen@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > > >
> > > > Was there a patch running around to limit bulkstat to init_user_ns?
> > > > Any other
> > > > items that needed to be addressed before applying this patch?
> > >
> > > Bulkstat has a capable(CAP_SYS_ADMIN) check and therefore can only be
> > > executed in the init name space. Similarly, all the open-by-handle
> > > interfaces have the same capable() checks so they can only be
> > > executed int he init name space, too.
> > Gah. I was under the impression that you could have a process with
> > CAP_SYS_ADMIN in a namespace other than init_user_ns.
> Ben, until about a week and a half ago I was also working under that
> same understanding as you.
Well huh. According to Dwight you can have a process with CAP_SYS_ADMIN in a
namespace other than init_user_ns. Kinda cool, IMO.