On Fri, Oct 2, 2009 at 05:31, Neil Brown <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Thursday October 1, [email protected] wrote:
>> Neil Brown wrote:
>> >> Two strategies for this situation are to stop mdmon after mounting the
>> >> rootfs, or just let it be terminated as a result of starting a new
>> >> instance from the final rootfs.  The latter approach brings up the
>> >> question of how to communicate with the initramfs-mdmon-instance to make
>> >> sure we do not end up with two mdmon instances servicing the same
>> >> container.  The proposed solution here is to switch to
>> >> abstract-namespace-sockets removing the need to drop a socket file.
>> >
>> > What exactly do you mean by "abstract-namespace-sockets"??
>>
>> Harald pointed me to this.  It's the hack that udev uses for its control
>> socket [1].  You create a unix domain socket as usual but make the first
>> character of the file name a NULL byte.
>
> ooohhhh..... that is soooo ugly!
> And given that anyone can bind to any 'abstract' name, there is room
> for a local denial-of-service attack there too.
>
> I guess we could use it if we really had to, but I'd rather avoid it
> if possible.

Right, you can only do that, if you are 100% sure, that the service
always runs and binds the socket before any other user can log in,
like udev does.

Kay
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe initramfs" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Reply via email to