Andy Lutomirski [off-list ref] writes:
Why should MNT_LOCKED on submounts be enforced?
Is it because, if you retain a reference to the detached tree, then
you can see under the submounts?
Yes. MNT_DETACH is a recursive operation that detaches all of the mount
and all of it's submounts. Which means you can see under the submounts
if you have a reference to a detached mount.
If so, let's fix *that*. Because
otherwise the whole model of pivot_root + detach will break.
I am not certain what you are referring to. pivot_root doesn't
manipulate the mount tree so you can see under anything.
What I believe is the appropriate fix is to fail umount2(...,MNT_DETACH)
if there are any referenced mount points being detached that have a
locked submount.
Also, damn it, we need change_the_ns_root instead of pivot_root. I
doubt that any container programs actually want to keep the old root
attached after pivot_root.
Shrug. Except for chroot_fs_refs() pivot_root is a cheap.
I'm not particularly in favor of merging pivot_root and umount2. The
number of weird cases in the current api are high. A merged piece of
code would just make them higher.
I am hoping that one more round of bug fixing will at least get the bugs
for having unprivileged mounts fixed in the current API.
Eric