archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Amir Goldstein <>
To: "Mickaël Salaün" <>
Cc: linux-kernel <>,
	"Al Viro" <>,
	"Andy Lutomirski" <>,
	"Anton Ivanov" <>,
	"Arnd Bergmann" <>,
	"Casey Schaufler" <>,
	"James Morris" <>,
	"Jann Horn" <>, "Jeff Dike" <>,
	"Jonathan Corbet" <>,
	"Kees Cook" <>,
	"Michael Kerrisk" <>,
	"Mickaël Salaün" <>,
	"Richard Weinberger" <>,
	"Serge E . Hallyn" <>,
	"Shuah Khan" <>,
	"Vincent Dagonneau" <>,,
	"Linux API" <>,,,
	linux-fsdevel <>,,
	"LSM List" <>,
Subject: Re: [PATCH v18 07/12] landlock: Support filesystem access-control
Date: Wed, 27 May 2020 06:07:29 +0300	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <>

On Wed, May 27, 2020 at 3:36 AM Mickaël Salaün <> wrote:
> Thanks to the Landlock objects and ruleset, it is possible to identify
> inodes according to a process's domain.  To enable an unprivileged
> process to express a file hierarchy, it first needs to open a directory
> (or a file) and pass this file descriptor to the kernel through
> landlock(2).  When checking if a file access request is allowed, we walk
> from the requested dentry to the real root, following the different
> mount layers.  The access to each "tagged" inodes are collected
> according to their rule layer level, and ANDed to create access to the
> requested file hierarchy.  This makes possible to identify a lot of
> files without tagging every inodes nor modifying the filesystem, while
> still following the view and understanding the user has from the
> filesystem.

Hi Mickael,

Nice work! I am interested in the problem of system wide file access
rules based on directory hierarchy [1][2]. Not the same problem, but
with obvious overlaps.

I sketched this untested POC [2] a while ago -
It introduces the concept of "border control" LSM hooks to avoid the
need to check which sections in the hierarchy an inode belongs to
on every syscall.

With this, you could cache a topology with id's per section and
cache the section id + topology generation in the inode's security state.
When inode crosses border control hooks, it's section id is updated.
When directory hierarchy topology changes, some or all of the cached
section id's are invalidated and rules <-> sections relations may need
to be changed.

Do you think something like that could be useful for landlock?

Note that the POC is using d_mountpoint() as the only type of "fence"
mark. It is sufficient for controlling rename in and out of containers, so
I just used an already available dentry flag for "fence".
If the border control hook concept is useful, this could be extended to
a more generic d_border_passing(), with some internal kernel API
to manage it and with all the bike shedding that comes with it...



  reply	other threads:[~2020-05-27  3:07 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-05-26 20:53 [PATCH v18 00/12] Landlock LSM Mickaël Salaün
2020-05-26 20:53 ` [PATCH v18 01/12] landlock: Add object management Mickaël Salaün
2020-05-26 20:53 ` [PATCH v18 02/12] landlock: Add ruleset and domain management Mickaël Salaün
2020-05-26 20:53 ` [PATCH v18 03/12] landlock: Set up the security framework and manage credentials Mickaël Salaün
2020-05-26 20:53 ` [PATCH v18 04/12] landlock: Add ptrace restrictions Mickaël Salaün
2020-05-26 20:53 ` [PATCH v18 05/12] LSM: Infrastructure management of the superblock Mickaël Salaün
2020-05-26 20:53 ` [PATCH v18 06/12] fs,security: Add sb_delete hook Mickaël Salaün
2020-05-26 20:53 ` [PATCH v18 07/12] landlock: Support filesystem access-control Mickaël Salaün
2020-05-27  3:07   ` Amir Goldstein [this message]
2020-05-29 11:29     ` Mickaël Salaün
2020-05-26 20:53 ` [PATCH v18 08/12] landlock: Add syscall implementation Mickaël Salaün
2020-05-26 20:53 ` [PATCH v18 09/12] arch: Wire up landlock() syscall Mickaël Salaün
2020-05-26 20:53 ` [PATCH v18 10/12] selftests/landlock: Add initial tests Mickaël Salaün
2020-05-26 20:53 ` [PATCH v18 11/12] samples/landlock: Add a sandbox manager example Mickaël Salaün
2020-05-26 20:53 ` [PATCH v18 12/12] landlock: Add user and kernel documentation Mickaël Salaün

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:

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to='' \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \

* 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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).