From: Justin Suess <utilityemal77@gmail.com>
To: "Mickaël Salaün" <mic@digikod.net>
Cc: gnoack3000@gmail.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/4] landlock: Add LANDLOCK_RESTRICT_SELF_NO_NEW_PRIVS
Date: Sun, 9 Aug 2026 11:31:01 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <anicFygFIdlz1r_U@zenbox> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260807.ohpairoh1Aeb@digikod.net>
On Fri, Aug 07, 2026 at 03:18:07PM +0200, Mickaël Salaün wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 03, 2026 at 06:31:05PM -0400, Justin Suess wrote:
> > Add a landlock_restrict_self(2) flag to set the no_new_privs attribute
> > of the calling thread only after enforcement of the ruleset:
> > no_new_privs is set if and only if the call succeeds. This removes the
> > need for a prior prctl(2) PR_SET_NO_NEW_PRIVS call and guarantees that
> > a failed enforcement leaves the attribute unchanged.
> >
> > Because no_new_privs is set by the call itself, the no_new_privs /
> > CAP_SYS_ADMIN requirement of landlock_restrict_self(2) is fulfilled by
> > construction, and the related EPERM check is skipped. As a consequence,
> > an unprivileged caller passing unknown flags along with this flag gets
> > EINVAL instead of EPERM.
> >
> > Unlike LANDLOCK_RESTRICT_SELF_LOG_SUBDOMAINS_OFF, this flag always
> > requires a valid ruleset: with a ruleset_fd of -1, such a call would be
> > nothing more than a Landlock-flavored prctl(2) PR_SET_NO_NEW_PRIVS, and
> > there is no valid use case for setting no_new_privs (possibly with
> > LANDLOCK_RESTRICT_SELF_TSYNC) without also enforcing Landlock
> > restrictions. Rejecting these calls also keeps the option of giving
> > them a meaning later.
> >
> > The attribute is only set past the last point of failure, just before
> > committing the new credentials. When combined with
> > LANDLOCK_RESTRICT_SELF_TSYNC, no_new_privs is set on the sibling threads
> > as well, in their commit phase, with the same ordering.
> >
> > Bump the Landlock ABI version to 11.
> >
> > Cc: Mickaël Salaün <mic@digikod.net>
> > Signed-off-by: Justin Suess <utilityemal77@gmail.com>
> > ---
> >
> > Notes:
> > v2->v3:
> > - Reword "atomically" to the ordering guarantee (no_new_privs is only set
> > once enforcement succeeded) in the commit message and both kdocs
> > - Explain in the commit message why the flag requires a valid ruleset
> >
> > include/uapi/linux/landlock.h | 13 +++++++++++++
> > security/landlock/limits.h | 2 +-
> > security/landlock/syscalls.c | 28 +++++++++++++++++++++-------
> > security/landlock/tsync.c | 8 ++++++--
> > security/landlock/tsync.h | 4 +++-
> > 5 files changed, 44 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/include/uapi/linux/landlock.h b/include/uapi/linux/landlock.h
> > index 27ae3f39cafb..11bf600698f0 100644
> > --- a/include/uapi/linux/landlock.h
> > +++ b/include/uapi/linux/landlock.h
> > @@ -191,12 +191,25 @@ struct landlock_ruleset_attr {
> > *
> > * If the calling thread is running with no_new_privs, this operation
> > * enables no_new_privs on the sibling threads as well.
> > + *
> > + * The following flag ties the no_new_privs attribute to the ruleset
> > + * enforcement:
> > + *
> > + * %LANDLOCK_RESTRICT_SELF_NO_NEW_PRIVS
> > + * Sets the no_new_privs attribute of the calling thread only once the
> > + * enforcement of the ruleset succeeded: no_new_privs is set if and only
> > + * if sys_landlock_restrict_self() succeeds. This removes the need for a
> > + * prior :manpage:`prctl(2)` ``PR_SET_NO_NEW_PRIVS`` call, and with it the
> > + * %CAP_SYS_ADMIN requirement. This flag requires a ruleset. When
> > + * combined with %LANDLOCK_RESTRICT_SELF_TSYNC, no_new_privs is set on the
> > + * sibling threads as well.
> > */
> > /* clang-format off */
> > #define LANDLOCK_RESTRICT_SELF_LOG_SAME_EXEC_OFF (1U << 0)
> > #define LANDLOCK_RESTRICT_SELF_LOG_NEW_EXEC_ON (1U << 1)
> > #define LANDLOCK_RESTRICT_SELF_LOG_SUBDOMAINS_OFF (1U << 2)
> > #define LANDLOCK_RESTRICT_SELF_TSYNC (1U << 3)
> > +#define LANDLOCK_RESTRICT_SELF_NO_NEW_PRIVS (1U << 4)
> > /* clang-format on */
> >
> > /**
> > diff --git a/security/landlock/limits.h b/security/landlock/limits.h
> > index 08d5f2f6d321..1a7c5fb8f6fd 100644
> > --- a/security/landlock/limits.h
> > +++ b/security/landlock/limits.h
> > @@ -34,7 +34,7 @@
> > #define LANDLOCK_NUM_ACCESS_MAX \
> > MAX(MAX(LANDLOCK_NUM_ACCESS_FS, LANDLOCK_NUM_ACCESS_NET), LANDLOCK_NUM_SCOPE)
> >
> > -#define LANDLOCK_LAST_RESTRICT_SELF LANDLOCK_RESTRICT_SELF_TSYNC
> > +#define LANDLOCK_LAST_RESTRICT_SELF LANDLOCK_RESTRICT_SELF_NO_NEW_PRIVS
> > #define LANDLOCK_MASK_RESTRICT_SELF ((LANDLOCK_LAST_RESTRICT_SELF << 1) - 1)
> >
> > /* clang-format on */
> > diff --git a/security/landlock/syscalls.c b/security/landlock/syscalls.c
> > index 36b02892c62f..e97f944109f9 100644
> > --- a/security/landlock/syscalls.c
> > +++ b/security/landlock/syscalls.c
> > @@ -169,7 +169,7 @@ static const struct file_operations ruleset_fops = {
> > * If the change involves a fix that requires userspace awareness, also update
> > * the errata documentation in Documentation/userspace-api/landlock.rst .
> > */
> > -const int landlock_abi_version = 10;
> > +const int landlock_abi_version = 11;
> >
> > /**
> > * sys_landlock_create_ruleset - Create a new ruleset
> > @@ -502,21 +502,28 @@ SYSCALL_DEFINE4(landlock_add_rule, const int, ruleset_fd,
> > * - %LANDLOCK_RESTRICT_SELF_LOG_NEW_EXEC_ON
> > * - %LANDLOCK_RESTRICT_SELF_LOG_SUBDOMAINS_OFF
> > * - %LANDLOCK_RESTRICT_SELF_TSYNC
> > + * - %LANDLOCK_RESTRICT_SELF_NO_NEW_PRIVS
> > *
> > * This system call enforces a Landlock ruleset on the current thread.
> > * Enforcing a ruleset requires that the task has %CAP_SYS_ADMIN in its
> > * namespace or is running with no_new_privs. This avoids scenarios where
> > * unprivileged tasks can affect the behavior of privileged children.
> > *
> > + * With %LANDLOCK_RESTRICT_SELF_NO_NEW_PRIVS, the no_new_privs attribute of the
> > + * calling thread is set only once the enforcement of the ruleset succeeded,
> > + * which fulfills the above requirement: no_new_privs is set if and only if the
> > + * call succeeds.
> > + *
> > * Return: 0 on success, or -errno on failure. Possible returned errors are:
> > *
> > * - %EOPNOTSUPP: Landlock is supported by the kernel but disabled at boot time;
> > * - %EINVAL: @flags contains an unknown bit.
> > * - %EBADF: @ruleset_fd is not a file descriptor for the current thread;
> > * - %EBADFD: @ruleset_fd is not a ruleset file descriptor;
> > - * - %EPERM: @ruleset_fd has no read access to the underlying ruleset, or the
> > - * current thread is not running with no_new_privs, or it doesn't have
> > - * %CAP_SYS_ADMIN in its namespace.
> > + * - %EPERM: @ruleset_fd has no read access to the underlying ruleset, or
> > + * %LANDLOCK_RESTRICT_SELF_NO_NEW_PRIVS is not set while the current thread
> > + * is not running with no_new_privs and doesn't have %CAP_SYS_ADMIN in its
> > + * namespace.
> > * - %E2BIG: The maximum number of stacked rulesets is reached for the current
> > * thread.
> > *
> > @@ -529,6 +536,8 @@ SYSCALL_DEFINE2(landlock_restrict_self, const int, ruleset_fd, const __u32,
> > struct landlock_ruleset *ruleset __free(landlock_put_ruleset) = NULL;
> > struct cred *new_cred;
> > struct landlock_cred_security *new_llcred;
> > + const bool set_no_new_privs =
> > + !!(flags & LANDLOCK_RESTRICT_SELF_NO_NEW_PRIVS);
>
> This variable should be set later (or not exist at all), see my next
> comment.
>
> > bool __maybe_unused log_same_exec, log_new_exec, log_subdomains,
> > prev_log_subdomains;
> >
> > @@ -537,9 +546,10 @@ SYSCALL_DEFINE2(landlock_restrict_self, const int, ruleset_fd, const __u32,
> >
> > /*
> > * Similar checks as for seccomp(2), except that an -EPERM may be
> > - * returned.
> > + * returned. LANDLOCK_RESTRICT_SELF_NO_NEW_PRIVS fulfills this
> > + * requirement.
> > */
> > - if (!task_no_new_privs(current) &&
> > + if (!set_no_new_privs && !task_no_new_privs(current) &&
>
> This is correct according to the current code, but kind of inconsistent
> wrt previous kernels (e.g. an unprivileged caller *without* NNP already
> set would get EPERM if it sets LANDLOCK_RESTRICT_SELF_NO_NEW_PRIVS,
> whereas it will now get EINVAL). In fact, a dedicated patch should move
> the NNP/CAP checks just after the flags check. This is a visible change
> but I think it would be cleaner this way. BTW, seccomp check flags in
> the same order.
>
If I understand you correctly:
This technically is an ABI change to existing behavior, but it's pretty
niche (for callers passing unknown flags w/o CAP_SYS_ADMIN ||
no_new_privs).
I'll add the tests in that commit as well to make it bisectable.
>
> > !ns_capable_noaudit(current_user_ns(), CAP_SYS_ADMIN))
> > return -EPERM;
> >
> > @@ -620,12 +630,16 @@ SYSCALL_DEFINE2(landlock_restrict_self, const int, ruleset_fd, const __u32,
> >
> > if (flags & LANDLOCK_RESTRICT_SELF_TSYNC) {
> > const int err = landlock_restrict_sibling_threads(
> > - current_cred(), new_cred);
> > + current_cred(), new_cred, flags);
> > if (err) {
> > abort_creds(new_cred);
> > return err;
> > }
> > }
> >
> > + /* Sets no_new_privs past the last point of failure. */
> > + if (set_no_new_privs)
> > + task_set_no_new_privs(current);
> > +
> > return commit_creds(new_cred);
> > }
> > diff --git a/security/landlock/tsync.c b/security/landlock/tsync.c
> > index c5730bbd9ed3..0b71e158c3f5 100644
> > --- a/security/landlock/tsync.c
> > +++ b/security/landlock/tsync.c
> > @@ -17,6 +17,7 @@
> > #include <linux/sched/task.h>
> > #include <linux/slab.h>
> > #include <linux/task_work.h>
> > +#include <uapi/linux/landlock.h>
> >
> > #include "cred.h"
> > #include "tsync.h"
> > @@ -466,7 +467,8 @@ static void cancel_tsync_works(const struct tsync_works *works,
> > * restrict_sibling_threads - enables a Landlock policy for all sibling threads
> > */
> > int landlock_restrict_sibling_threads(const struct cred *old_cred,
> > - const struct cred *new_cred)
> > + const struct cred *new_cred,
> > + const u32 restrict_flags)
> > {
> > int err;
> > struct tsync_shared_context shared_ctx;
> > @@ -481,7 +483,9 @@ int landlock_restrict_sibling_threads(const struct cred *old_cred,
> > init_completion(&shared_ctx.all_finished);
> > shared_ctx.old_cred = old_cred;
> > shared_ctx.new_cred = new_cred;
> > - shared_ctx.set_no_new_privs = task_no_new_privs(current);
> > + shared_ctx.set_no_new_privs =
> > + (restrict_flags & LANDLOCK_RESTRICT_SELF_NO_NEW_PRIVS) ||
> > + task_no_new_privs(current);
> >
> > /*
> > * Serialize concurrent TSYNC operations to prevent deadlocks when
> > diff --git a/security/landlock/tsync.h b/security/landlock/tsync.h
> > index ef86bb61c2f6..2ae4f938ca00 100644
> > --- a/security/landlock/tsync.h
> > +++ b/security/landlock/tsync.h
> > @@ -9,8 +9,10 @@
> > #define _SECURITY_LANDLOCK_TSYNC_H
> >
> > #include <linux/cred.h>
> > +#include <linux/types.h>
> >
> > int landlock_restrict_sibling_threads(const struct cred *old_cred,
> > - const struct cred *new_cred);
> > + const struct cred *new_cred,
> > + u32 restrict_flags);
> >
> > #endif /* _SECURITY_LANDLOCK_TSYNC_H */
> > --
> > 2.54.0
> >
> >
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-08-09 15:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-08-03 22:31 [PATCH v3 0/4] Implement LANDLOCK_RESTRICT_SELF_NO_NEW_PRIVS Justin Suess
2026-08-03 22:31 ` [PATCH v3 1/4] landlock: Add LANDLOCK_RESTRICT_SELF_NO_NEW_PRIVS Justin Suess
2026-08-07 10:51 ` Mickaël Salaün
2026-08-07 13:18 ` Mickaël Salaün
2026-08-09 15:31 ` Justin Suess [this message]
2026-08-11 7:16 ` Mickaël Salaün
2026-08-03 22:31 ` [PATCH v3 2/4] selftests/landlock: Test LANDLOCK_RESTRICT_SELF_NO_NEW_PRIVS Justin Suess
2026-08-07 10:48 ` Mickaël Salaün
2026-08-03 22:31 ` [PATCH v3 3/4] landlock: Document LANDLOCK_RESTRICT_SELF_NO_NEW_PRIVS Justin Suess
2026-08-07 10:57 ` Mickaël Salaün
2026-08-03 22:31 ` [PATCH v3 4/4] samples/landlock: Add LANDLOCK_RESTRICT_SELF_NO_NEW_PRIVS to sampler Justin Suess
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=anicFygFIdlz1r_U@zenbox \
--to=utilityemal77@gmail.com \
--cc=gnoack3000@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mic@digikod.net \
/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
Powered by JetHome