From: "Dwi Siswanto" <me@dw1.io>
To: "Günther Noack" <gnoack3000@gmail.com>
Cc: "Mickaël Salaün" <mic@digikod.net>,
"Günther Noack" <gnoack@google.com>,
linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org, stable@vger.kernel.org,
"Paul Moore" <paul@paul-moore.com>,
"James Morris" <jmorris@namei.org>,
"Serge E. Hallyn" <serge@hallyn.com>,
"Konstantin Meskhidze" <konstantin.meskhidze@huawei.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] landlock: Fix layer composition of LANDLOCK_ACCESS_FS_REFER
Date: Sun, 1 Nov 2026 19:47:50 +0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20261101125114.19009-1-me@dw1.io> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20261030102411.12985-2-gnoack3000@gmail.com>
I saw the docs still describe the old one. include/uapi/linux/landlock.h
says:
* For historical reasons, the %LANDLOCK_ACCESS_FS_REFER right is always denied
* by default, even when its bit is not set in @handled_access_fs.
and, for LANDLOCK_ACCESS_FS_REFER itself:
* This is the only access right which is denied by default by any ruleset,
* even if the right is not specified as handled at ruleset creation time.
So ruleset that handles no filesystem access right never denies
LANDLOCK_ACCESS_FS_REFER -- alone or layered.
Also, the comment above _LANDLOCK_ACCESS_FS_INITIALLY_DENIED in access.h
has the same problem:
* All access rights that are denied by default whether they are handled or not
* by a ruleset/layer. This must be ORed with all domain->handled_masks[]
* entries when we need to get the absolute handled access masks, see
* landlock_upgrade_handled_access_masks().
After this patch, the mask only applies to layers that handle filesystem
access, and after patch 3, nothing ORs it in at read time. *Someone* who
follows the comment could bring the bug back.
> + access_mask_t handled = domain->handled_masks[layer_level].fs;
> +
> + /*
> + * Handles all initially denied by default access rights, but only for
> + * layers handling filesystem accesses.
> + */
> + if (handled)
> + handled |= _LANDLOCK_ACCESS_FS_INITIALLY_DENIED;
> +
> + return handled;
nit: I believe landlock_upgrade_handled_access_masks() already has the
same "only if fs is non-zero" rule, so this could be
return landlock_upgrade_handled_access_masks(
domain->handled_masks[layer_level]).fs;
Which keep the rule in one place. It matters little if patch 3 goes in
on top, and 6.12 doesn't have the helper. What do you think?
Best!
Dwi
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-11-01 12:51 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <20261030102411.12985-1-gnoack3000@gmail.com>
2026-10-30 10:24 ` Günther Noack
2026-11-01 12:47 ` Dwi Siswanto [this message]
2026-11-01 16:55 ` Günther Noack
2026-10-30 10:24 ` [PATCH 2/3] selftests/landlock: Test that layering does not break refer Günther Noack
2026-10-30 10:24 ` [PATCH 3/3] landlock: Simplify landlock_get_fs_access_mask() Günther Noack
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20261101125114.19009-1-me@dw1.io \
--to=me@dw1.io \
--cc=gnoack3000@gmail.com \
--cc=gnoack@google.com \
--cc=jmorris@namei.org \
--cc=konstantin.meskhidze@huawei.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mic@digikod.net \
--cc=paul@paul-moore.com \
--cc=serge@hallyn.com \
--cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®