On 5/15/15 0:18 , Chris Ridd wrote:
> 
>> On 14 May 2015, at 16:00, Robert Mustacchi <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> On 5/14/15 6:18 , Joe Malcolm wrote:
>>> Yes, I figured this was the case - thanks for confirming. I knew it
>>> was containerized, but not that it couldn't fork.
>>>
>>> Out of curiousity, do the SmartOS orchestration tools (vmadm, etc.)
>>> expose these additional limitations, such as disabling forking, in
>>> some generic way, so they could be applied to non-kvm zones? Well, not
>>> being able to fork may not be the most sensible example in general,
>>> since that would make most zone applications impossible, but
>>> presumably there's a general mechanism down there somewhere.
>>
>> Yes, this is a part of the general privileges mechanism. If you want to
>> deny the entire zone a set of privileges (I wouldn't do this for fork),
>> then you can use the vmadm 'limit_priv' property.
>>
>> However, what you'll find more useful is probably the libc interfaces
>> for dropping privileges and the ppriv (http://illumos.org/man/1/ppriv)
>> command which will let you make the change for an individual process and
>> its children that you launch.
> 
> Would privileges apply to Linux processes running inside an LX branded zone?

Yes, they still apply. If I remember correctly, you'll also see some
Linux tools see some of them phrased in terms of Linux capabilities. But
you can just as easily use the native ppriv to launch a Linux process in
the lx zone as a native process.

Robert


-------------------------------------------
smartos-discuss
Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/184463/=now
RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/184463/25769125-55cfbc00
Modify Your Subscription: 
https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=25769125&id_secret=25769125-7688e9fb
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com

Reply via email to