Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!bellcore!decvax!decwrl!pyramid!pesnta!amd!amdcad!lll-crg!seismo!brl-sem!ron
From: ron@brl-sem.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.sources.bugs
Subject: Re: Chroot (was Re: Beware of Blindly Un-SHARing a File)
Message-ID: <191@brl-sem.ARPA>
Date: Tue, 29-Apr-86 17:18:55 EDT
Article-I.D.: brl-sem.191
Posted: Tue Apr 29 17:18:55 1986
Date-Received: Sat, 3-May-86 18:15:26 EDT
References: <947@kitty.UUCP> <2407@prls.UUCP> <1439@garfield.columbia.edu> <460@aoa.UUCP>
Organization: Ballistic Research Lab (BRL), APG, MD.
Lines: 16
Keywords: ``Relink'' April Fool

> I thought that chroot() caused open()s and creat()s and the like to use the
> new root, but didn't affect the interpretation of root for exec().  Anybody
> know for certain?
> 
> Also, does anybody know if there are brain-damaged implementations of chroot()
> out there?
> 
1.  CHROOT is not universal.
2.  At least 4.2 CHROOT works for any access, I'd think it would be
    more difficult to go and modify nami to do something different when
    looking up different types of objects.
3.  If you chroot, you must have an entire duplicate system under the
    new root including /etc/passwd, and all commands that might want
    to get run.
4.  I think I'll stick to busting apart files from the net with EMACS.
5.  Providing leaders the decisive edge.