Date: Thu, 2 Sep 1999 22:03:06 +0700 (ALMST) From: Boris Popov <bp@butya.kz> To: adrian@freebsd.org Cc: Doug Rabson <dfr@nlsystems.com>, "Andrew J. Korty" <ajk@purdue.edu>, freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: [mount.c]: Option "user"-patch Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.10.9909022145480.95414-100000@lion.butya.kz> In-Reply-To: <19990901003014.A1215@ewok.creative.net.au>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, 1 Sep 1999 adrian@freebsd.org wrote: > On Tue, Aug 31, 1999, Doug Rabson wrote: > > On Mon, 30 Aug 1999, Andrew J. Korty wrote: > > > > > I provided a solution via send-pr (bin/11031) over four months ago, > > > which is, in my opinion, superior in many ways to this sysctl > > > approach. The patch contains an amendment to the mount(1) manual > > > page. > > > > I have not reviewed this pr myself but it seems like a well thought out > > change to the system. Would the people who are involved with the current > > (more limited) proposed change like to review this and possibly use it > > instead. I don't want to lose anyones work here if it could be useful. > > You realise that this kind of stuff can be done in kernelspace, > without needing yet another setuid binary/binaries.. Well, sysctl with list of pathes for user mounts looks good. Configuration is simple and can be easliy changed at runtime. It is always better to avoid setuid'ed binaries, this is more worse that mount(8) can execute other mount_* binaries. However, as pointed by Mike Smith, enabling user mounts raises a risc of kernel panics from, for example, corrupted floppy disk. This should lead to more stronger *fs code. -- Boris Popov http://www.butya.kz/~bp/ To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.4.10.9909022145480.95414-100000>