[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: [libvirt] [PATCH 4/4] qemu: add VFIO devices to cgroup ACL



On 04/26/2013 11:42 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 26, 2013 at 11:16:14AM -0400, Laine Stump wrote:
>> On 04/26/2013 04:52 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
>>> On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 09:44:33PM -0400, Laine Stump wrote:
>>>> We don't know exactly the names of the VFIO devices that will be
>>>> needed (and due to hotplug, we can't ever assume we won't need them at
>>>> all), so we just add an ACL to allow any vfio device - they all have
>>>> the major number 244 (/dev/vfio/vfio is 244,0, and the /dev/vfio/n
>>>> devices are up from there).
>>> We do the correct labelling of the /dev/vfio/"N" device in the
>>> security drivers, so we should be able todo the same for cgroups
>>> device ACL. Allowing all "N" is not acceptable from a security
>>> POV.
>> Up until now there hasn't been any cgroup-related code in the security
>> drivers, though. So where should this go? Do we need a new driver
>> backend for cgroups? This would then mean that we need to have three
>> tiers of security drivers rather than two. Or can it just be put in the
>> DAC driver?
> We manage perfectly well to configure ACLs for individual disks that
> a VM is given without having to wildcard allow every single /dev/sdN
> disk. That fact that you were able to make the security drivers label
> the /dev/vfio/n devices correctly, shows that the information required
> is available. So why can't you set the cgroups ACLs correctly here too ?
> There's no need to move cgroups code into any security driver.
>

Sorry, my brain combined the first and second sentences of your message,
and understood that you wanted this to happen in the security driver.
I'll look up what's done for disks.


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]