NEWS: note about future implicit PrivateUsers= in user units

This commit is contained in:
Luca Boccassi 2023-02-08 13:38:38 +00:00
parent 70879f6ccd
commit 318c257835

16
NEWS
View file

@ -18,6 +18,22 @@ CHANGES WITH 253 in spe:
For more details, see:
https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/systemd-devel/2022-September/048352.html
* We intend to change behaviour w.r.t. units of the per-user service
manager and sandboxing options, so that they work without having to
manually enable PrivateUsers= as well, which is not required for
system units. To make this work, we will implicitly enable user
namespaces (PrivateUsers=yes) when a sandboxing option is enabled in a
user unit. The drawback is that system users will no longer be visible
(and appear as 'nobody') to the user unit when a sandboxing option is
enabled. By definition a sandboxed user unit should run with reduced
privileges, so impact should be small. This will remove a great source
of confusion that has been reported by users over the years, due to
how these options require an extra setting to be manually enabled when
used in the per-user service manager, as opposed as to the system
service manager. We plan to enable this change in the next release
later this year. For more details, see:
https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/systemd-devel/2022-December/048682.html
Deprecations and incompatible changes:
* systemctl will now warn when invoked without /proc/ mounted