From owner-freebsd-hackers  Mon Nov  8 22: 5:37 1999
Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
Received: from critter.freebsd.dk (critter.freebsd.dk [212.242.40.131])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id D9E9814A1F; Mon,  8 Nov 1999 22:05:33 -0800 (PST)
	(envelope-from phk@critter.freebsd.dk)
Received: from critter.freebsd.dk (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by critter.freebsd.dk (8.9.3/8.9.2) with ESMTP id HAA21884;
	Tue, 9 Nov 1999 07:05:17 +0100 (CET)
	(envelope-from phk@critter.freebsd.dk)
To: Yoshinobu Inoue <shin@nd.net.fujitsu.co.jp>
Cc: freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG, freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject: Re: Should jail treat ip-number? 
In-reply-to: Your message of "Tue, 09 Nov 1999 12:54:45 +0900."
             <19991109125445E.shin@nd.net.fujitsu.co.jp> 
Date: Tue, 09 Nov 1999 07:05:17 +0100
Message-ID: <21882.942127517@critter.freebsd.dk>
From: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@critter.freebsd.dk>
Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk
X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG

In message <19991109125445E.shin@nd.net.fujitsu.co.jp>, Yoshinobu Inoue writes:
>Hello,
>
>I have some concern about jail, and would like to discuss them.
>
>Currentlly jail set an ip-number and let prisoned processes
>only to bind it.
>My concerns are,
>
>(1)When IPv6 is added to the system, more general id would be
>   desirable.

I agree, *IF* IPv6 ever becomes a reality, we will look at this.

>(2)What is the goal of the restriction?

To isolate people in the jail from the "real" machine and from
other jails.

>   If physical level access protection is wanted,

it isn't.

--
Poul-Henning Kamp             FreeBSD coreteam member
phk@FreeBSD.ORG               "Real hackers run -current on their laptop."
FreeBSD -- It will take a long time before progress goes too far!


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message