when we create a container, there are no strict restrictions on the name format. I think we should improve it.
Ⅱ. Describe what happened
Example:
root@compatibility:~# pouch run --name new:invalid busybox top
root@compatibility:~# pouch ps
root@compatibility:~# Name ID Status Created Image Runtime
new:invalid 9e1627 Up 5 seconds 4 seconds ago busybox:latest runc
Ⅲ. Describe what you expected to happen
There should be an Error response from daemon.
Actually, container name (new:invalid), only [a-zA-Z0-9][a-zA-Z0-9_.-] should be allowed.
Ⅳ. How to reproduce it (as minimally and precisely as possible)
1.
2.
3.
Ⅴ. Anything else we need to know?
I think the format of the input of all instructions' parameters should be strictly limited.
Ⅰ. Issue Description
when we create a container, there are no strict restrictions on the name format. I think we should improve it.
Ⅱ. Describe what happened
Example:
Ⅲ. Describe what you expected to happen
There should be an Error response from daemon. Actually, container name (new:invalid), only [a-zA-Z0-9][a-zA-Z0-9_.-] should be allowed.
Ⅳ. How to reproduce it (as minimally and precisely as possible)
1. 2. 3.
Ⅴ. Anything else we need to know?
I think the format of the input of all instructions' parameters should be strictly limited.
Ⅵ. Environment:
pouch version
):uname -a
):