On Fri, Aug 22, 2003 at 08:42:45AM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Thu, Aug 21, 2003 at 04:24:46PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote: > > (Hmm, maybe you could use tmpfs for /tmp, and mount the same one in both > > the real root and the chroot? I've never tried this myself.) > > Doesn't help as tmpfs instances are compeltly separate. I was afraid of that. > You could mount --bind the real /tmp into the chroot /tmp - but then > you've lost all benefits of the chroot vs tmpfile races at least.. Yup. A clumsy approach to sharing a tmpfs instance would open you up to exactly the same thing. I think the best fix is probably for X to get into the 1990s and use /var/run instead of /tmp for the X server socket directory. Though maybe even that isn't much help, as most people don't share /var/run across chroots either. At least it's not a mode 1777 directory by default. -- G. Branden Robinson | It is the responsibility of Debian GNU/Linux | intellectuals to tell the truth and branden@debian.org | expose lies. http://people.debian.org/~branden/ | -- Noam Chomsky
Attachment:
pgpnLKIY97pPn.pgp
Description: PGP signature