On 02/18/13 01:54, Harald Schmalzbauer wrote:
schrieb Jamie Gritton am 16.02.2013 00:40 (localtime):
On 02/15/13 09:27, Harald Schmalzbauer wrote:
Hello,
like already posted, on 9.1-R, I highly appreciate the new jail(8) and
jail.conf capabilities. Thanks for that extension!
Accidentally I saw that "devfs_ruleset" seems to be ignored.
If I list /dev/ I see all the hosts disk devices etc.
I set "devfs_ruleset = 4;" and "enforce_statfs = 1;" in jail.conf.
Inside the jail,
sysctl security.jail.devfs_ruleset returnes "1".
But like mentioned, I can access all devices...
Thanks for any help,
-Harry
devfs_ruleset is only used along with mount.devfs - do you also have
that set in jail.conf?
Thanks for your response.
Yes, I have mount.devfs; set.
Otherwise I wouldn't have any device inside my jail. Verified - and like
intended, right?
Another notable discrepancy: The man page tells that devfs_rulset is "4"
by default.
But when I don't set devfs_rulset in jail.conf at all, inside the jail,
'sysctl security.jail.devfs_ruleset': 0
When set, like mentioned above, it returns the corresponding value, but
it doesn't have any effect.
How gets devfs_rulset handled? Does jail(8) do the whole job? I'd like
to help finding the source, but have missed the whole new jail evolution...
Inside my jails, I don't have a fstab, outside I have them defined and
enabled with "mount" - and noticed the non-reverted umounting.
I found the problem - I noticed you mentioned 9.1-R, and took a look at
devfs(5). On CURRENT, there's a mount option "ruleset", that isn't there
on 9.
So I'll have to get around it by running devfs(8) after the mount. I'll
work on a patch for that.
- Jamie
_______________________________________________
freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
