Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

features: add support for potentiallyUnsafeConfigAnnotations #1444

Merged

Conversation

haircommander
Copy link
Contributor

list generated by finding all instances of find_annotation

(note to reviewer: I don't know if they're all unsafe and I probably will end up omitting some, per your request)

@haircommander haircommander force-pushed the potentially_unsafe_config_annotations branch from 23cd2e5 to af9b6cc Compare April 1, 2024 20:23
Comment on lines 368 to 379
"run.oci.handler",
"run.oci.systemd.subgroup",
"run.oci.mount_context_type",
"run.oci.systemd.force_cgroup_v1",
"run.oci.keep_original_groups",
"run.oci.pidfd_receiver",
"run.oci.hooks.stdout",
"run.oci.hooks.stderr",
"run.oci.seccomp.plugins",
"run.oci.seccomp.receiver",
"run.oci.seccomp_bpf_data",
"run.oci.seccomp_fail_unknown_syscall",
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

is run.oci.* a valid value?

If so, that would be better, as potentially any run.oci.* annotation can change the behavior of the runtime

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

not with the asterisk, but yeah I can do a generic one

@haircommander haircommander force-pushed the potentially_unsafe_config_annotations branch 2 times, most recently from 1d6e4fb to 2c275c4 Compare April 2, 2024 16:44
@giuseppe
Copy link
Member

could you run make clang-format and re-push?

@@ -3093,7 +3093,7 @@ libcrun_set_usernamespace (libcrun_container_t *container, pid_t pid, libcrun_er
return 0;
}

#define CAP_TO_MASK_0(x) (1L << ((x) & 31))
#define CAP_TO_MASK_0(x) (1L << ((x) &31))
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

seems unrelated to the patchset

list generated by finding all instances of `find_annotation`

Signed-off-by: Peter Hunt <pehunt@redhat.com>
@haircommander haircommander force-pushed the potentially_unsafe_config_annotations branch from 2c275c4 to 475a3fd Compare April 10, 2024 19:55
@giuseppe
Copy link
Member

the failure doesn't depend on this patch, so I am merging anyway

@giuseppe giuseppe merged commit 7202095 into containers:main Apr 11, 2024
51 of 52 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

2 participants