Bug 70873 – patches for mount: ignore managed/kudzu options

• Product: Gentoo Linux
• Status: RESOLVED FIXED

[Description foser (RETIRED) 2004-11-11 15:06:16 UTC]

Here's 2 patches I'd like to be considered for addition to util-linux .

1. managed.patch : add the 'managed' noop keyword that can be used by hal to remove entries it creates (manages) from fstab
2. console.patch : add a pamconsole option to mount options, so only user at the console can mount. This is a safety measure so only local users should be able to mount removable devices.

Both are RH patches. According to some mail i read on this (1) is supposed to be added mainstream anyway. 2 is a RH-ism (?), but our pam seems to support it already, so adding it here doesn't seem to be too intrusive.

Both patches were taken from rawhide rpms.

[Comment 1 foser (RETIRED) 2004-11-11 15:07:56 UTC]

Created attachment 43744 [details, diff]
mount managed noop keyword patch

this adds the 'managed' keyword.. because it's a RH patch it also adds 'kudzu'
as noop. We could probably remove that.

[Comment 2 foser (RETIRED) 2004-11-11 15:08:33 UTC]

Created attachment 43745 [details, diff]
add pamconsole option to mount

[Comment 3 SpanKY 2004-11-11 15:10:06 UTC]

i dont see how (2) is really useful ... someone could simply compile their own version of mount and get around the pam requirement

[Comment 4 foser (RETIRED) 2004-11-11 15:30:36 UTC]

You don't even have to compile your own version of mount to get around it, thats not really the point. It's just a basic measure to have a somewhat safer default policy.

[Comment 5 SpanKY 2004-11-11 18:25:48 UTC]

util-linux-2.12i now includes the mount ignore managed patch, thanks

[Comment 6 foser (RETIRED) 2004-11-12 05:39:37 UTC]

there's 2 patches here.. 

[Comment 7 SpanKY 2004-11-12 08:45:28 UTC]

going by comments #3 and #4 here, the second patch wont be added since it has no real merit

[Comment 8 foser (RETIRED) 2004-11-12 09:27:41 UTC]

it has a real merit, just because it's not secure to a paranoia degree it doesn't mean it has no use at all, it is safer than the default. The patch is hardly intrusive, so i see no reason not to add it.

[Comment 9 SpanKY 2004-11-12 10:04:12 UTC]

so feel free to add it to a local ebuild on your machine, it's not going into portage