Hi Junjiro, yes, I still remember the discussion.
Most distribution still discuss about CONFIG_USER_NS being set to yes or no, which is a requirement for FS_USERNS_MOUNT to have an effect. However, as we're not really sure about any possible security issues this could bring to aufs, it would probably the best to let users decide by adding a CONFIG_AUFS_USERNS_MOUNT option (attached with a fat warning that it's not really tested and could cause security issues). It's interesting to note that during the preparation of the regular filesystems, FS_USERNS_MOUNT was not set for these filesystems, either: https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/9/21/561 . It's currently only set for devpts, proc, ramfs and sysfs. Florian Am 23.06.2014 06:10, schrieb sf...@users.sourceforge.net: > Bhushan, Florian, > > Do you still remember the discussion about FS_USERNS_MOUNT in last year? > > I am going to introduce a new configuration CONFIG_AUFS_USERNS_MOUNT > which sets FS_USERNS_MOUNT which allows an unprivileged user mount aufs > within userns. > In other words, I cannot decide which way to go and leave users the > decision. > > If you have any opinion, please let me know. > > > J. R. Okajima >
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
------------------------------------------------------------------------------ HPCC Systems Open Source Big Data Platform from LexisNexis Risk Solutions Find What Matters Most in Your Big Data with HPCC Systems Open Source. Fast. Scalable. Simple. Ideal for Dirty Data. Leverages Graph Analysis for Fast Processing & Easy Data Exploration http://p.sf.net/sfu/hpccsystems
