Closed johanot closed 6 months ago
The Kubernetes project currently lacks enough contributors to adequately respond to all issues.
This bot triages un-triaged issues according to the following rules:
lifecycle/stale
is appliedlifecycle/stale
was applied, lifecycle/rotten
is appliedlifecycle/rotten
was applied, the issue is closedYou can:
/remove-lifecycle stale
/close
Please send feedback to sig-contributor-experience at kubernetes/community.
/lifecycle stale
The Kubernetes project currently lacks enough active contributors to adequately respond to all issues.
This bot triages un-triaged issues according to the following rules:
lifecycle/stale
is appliedlifecycle/stale
was applied, lifecycle/rotten
is appliedlifecycle/rotten
was applied, the issue is closedYou can:
/remove-lifecycle rotten
/close
Please send feedback to sig-contributor-experience at kubernetes/community.
/lifecycle rotten
The Kubernetes project currently lacks enough active contributors to adequately respond to all issues and PRs.
This bot triages issues according to the following rules:
lifecycle/stale
is appliedlifecycle/stale
was applied, lifecycle/rotten
is appliedlifecycle/rotten
was applied, the issue is closedYou can:
/reopen
/remove-lifecycle rotten
Please send feedback to sig-contributor-experience at kubernetes/community.
/close not-planned
@k8s-triage-robot: Closing this issue, marking it as "Not Planned".
re: https://github.com/kubernetes/mount-utils/blob/master/mount_linux.go#L325
If mount options themselves contain a comma, it is possible for one mount option to be interpreted as multiple options. This might be a problem especially for sensitive mount options that can cause leakages of sensitive values into logfiles.
e.g.
password=my,passw0rd
will give an error like: "Invalid mount option passw0rd" in the kernel log (denpeding on the mount driver)This issue might be out of scope for this library to handle, since fs-drivers (afaik, correct me?) behave differently and some might allow escaping of mount options with backslash while others might not. So I'm fine with this being closed as: "up to the implementer to guard against" - as long as that's a conscious decision.