From: "Mickaël Salaün" <mic@digikod.net>
To: Tingmao Wang <m@maowtm.org>
Cc: Song Liu <song@kernel.org>,
linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org, bpf@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kernel-team@meta.com,
andrii@kernel.org, eddyz87@gmail.com, ast@kernel.org,
daniel@iogearbox.net, martin.lau@linux.dev,
viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk, brauner@kernel.org, jack@suse.cz,
kpsingh@kernel.org, mattbobrowski@google.com,
amir73il@gmail.com, repnop@google.com, jlayton@kernel.org,
josef@toxicpanda.com, gnoack@google.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next 2/4] landlock: Use path_parent()
Date: Mon, 2 Jun 2025 19:35:47 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20250602.Oqu6piethung@digikod.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <027d5190-b37a-40a8-84e9-4ccbc352bcdf@maowtm.org>
On Sat, May 31, 2025 at 02:51:22PM +0100, Tingmao Wang wrote:
> On 5/28/25 23:26, Song Liu wrote:
> > Use path_parent() to walk a path up to its parent.
> >
> > While path_parent() has an extra check with path_connected() than existing
> > code, there is no functional changes intended for landlock.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Song Liu <song@kernel.org>
> > ---
> > security/landlock/fs.c | 34 +++++++++++++++++-----------------
> > 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/security/landlock/fs.c b/security/landlock/fs.c
> > index 6fee7c20f64d..32a24758ad6e 100644
> > --- a/security/landlock/fs.c
> > +++ b/security/landlock/fs.c
> > @@ -837,7 +837,6 @@ static bool is_access_to_paths_allowed(
> > * restriction.
> > */
> > while (true) {
> > - struct dentry *parent_dentry;
> > const struct landlock_rule *rule;
> >
> > /*
> > @@ -896,19 +895,17 @@ static bool is_access_to_paths_allowed(
> > if (allowed_parent1 && allowed_parent2)
> > break;
> > jump_up:
> > - if (walker_path.dentry == walker_path.mnt->mnt_root) {
> > - if (follow_up(&walker_path)) {
> > - /* Ignores hidden mount points. */
> > - goto jump_up;
> > - } else {
> > - /*
> > - * Stops at the real root. Denies access
> > - * because not all layers have granted access.
> > - */
> > - break;
> > - }
> > - }
> > - if (unlikely(IS_ROOT(walker_path.dentry))) {
> > + switch (path_parent(&walker_path)) {
> > + case PATH_PARENT_CHANGED_MOUNT:
> > + /* Ignores hidden mount points. */
> > + goto jump_up;
> > + case PATH_PARENT_REAL_ROOT:
> > + /*
> > + * Stops at the real root. Denies access
> > + * because not all layers have granted access.
> > + */
> > + goto walk_done;
> > + case PATH_PARENT_DISCONNECTED_ROOT:
> > /*
> > * Stops at disconnected root directories. Only allows
> > * access to internal filesystems (e.g. nsfs, which is
>
> I was looking at the existing handling of disconnected root in Landlock
> and I realized that the comment here confused me a bit:
>
> /*
> * Stops at disconnected root directories. Only allows
> * access to internal filesystems (e.g. nsfs, which is
> * reachable through /proc/<pid>/ns/<namespace>).
> */
>
> In the original code, this was under a
>
> if (unlikely(IS_ROOT(walker_path.dentry)))
>
> which means that it only stops walking if we found out we're disconnected
> after reaching a filesystem boundary. However if before we got to this
> point, we have already collected enough rules to allow access, access
> would be allowed, even if we're currently disconnected. Demo:
>
> / # cd /
> / # cp /linux/samples/landlock/sandboxer .
> / # mkdir a b
> / # mkdir a/foo
> / # echo baz > a/foo/bar
> / # mount --bind a b
> / # LL_FS_RO=/ LL_FS_RW=/ ./sandboxer bash
> Executing the sandboxed command...
> / # cd /b/foo
> /b/foo # cat bar
> baz
> /b/foo # mv /a/foo /foo
> /b/foo # cd .. # <- We're now disconnected
> bash: cd: ..: No such file or directory
> /b/foo # cat bar
> baz # <- but landlock still lets us read the file
>
> However, I think this patch will change this behavior due to the use of
> path_connected
>
> root@10a8fff999ce:/# mkdir a b
> root@10a8fff999ce:/# mkdir a/foo
> root@10a8fff999ce:/# echo baz > a/foo/bar
> root@10a8fff999ce:/# mount --bind a b
> root@10a8fff999ce:/# LL_FS_RO=/ LL_FS_RW=/ ./sandboxer bash
> Executing the sandboxed command...
> bash: cannot set terminal process group (191): Inappropriate ioctl for device
> bash: no job control in this shell
> root@10a8fff999ce:/# cd /b/foo
> root@10a8fff999ce:/b/foo# cat bar
> baz
> root@10a8fff999ce:/b/foo# mv /a/foo /foo
> root@10a8fff999ce:/b/foo# cd ..
> bash: cd: ..: No such file or directory
> root@10a8fff999ce:/b/foo# cat bar
> cat: bar: Permission denied
This is a good test case, we should add a test for that.
>
> I'm not sure if the original behavior was intentional, but since this
> technically counts as a functional changes, just pointing this out.
This is indeed an issue.
>
> Also I'm slightly worried about the performance overhead of doing
> path_connected for every hop in the iteration (but ultimately it's
> Mickaël's call).
Yes, we need to check with a benchmark. We might want to keep the
walker_path.dentry == walker_path.mnt->mnt_root check inlined.
> At least for Landlock, I think if we want to block all
> access to disconnected files, as long as we eventually realize we have
> been disconnected (by doing the "if dentry == path.mnt" check once when we
> reach root), and in that case deny access, we should be good.
>
>
> > @@ -918,12 +915,15 @@ static bool is_access_to_paths_allowed(
> > allowed_parent1 = true;
> > allowed_parent2 = true;
> > }
> > + goto walk_done;
> > + case PATH_PARENT_SAME_MOUNT:
> > break;
> > + default:
> > + WARN_ON_ONCE(1);
> > + goto walk_done;
> > }
> > - parent_dentry = dget_parent(walker_path.dentry);
> > - dput(walker_path.dentry);
> > - walker_path.dentry = parent_dentry;
> > }
> > +walk_done:
> > path_put(&walker_path);
> >
> > if (!allowed_parent1) {
>
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-06-02 17:35 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 45+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-05-28 22:26 [PATCH bpf-next 0/4] bpf path iterator Song Liu
2025-05-28 22:26 ` [PATCH bpf-next 1/4] namei: Introduce new helper function path_parent() Song Liu
2025-05-28 22:26 ` [PATCH bpf-next 2/4] landlock: Use path_parent() Song Liu
2025-05-31 13:51 ` Tingmao Wang
2025-06-02 13:36 ` Song Liu
2025-06-03 0:10 ` Song Liu
2025-06-03 12:47 ` Mickaël Salaün
2025-06-02 17:35 ` Mickaël Salaün [this message]
2025-06-02 22:56 ` Tingmao Wang
2025-05-28 22:26 ` [PATCH bpf-next 3/4] bpf: Introduce path iterator Song Liu
2025-05-28 22:37 ` Al Viro
2025-05-29 11:58 ` Jan Kara
2025-05-29 16:53 ` Song Liu
2025-05-29 16:57 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2025-05-29 17:05 ` Song Liu
2025-05-30 14:20 ` Mickaël Salaün
2025-06-02 9:41 ` Christian Brauner
2025-06-03 9:46 ` Jan Kara
2025-06-03 12:49 ` Mickaël Salaün
2025-06-03 21:13 ` Jan Kara
2025-05-29 17:38 ` Al Viro
2025-05-29 18:00 ` Song Liu
2025-05-29 18:35 ` Al Viro
2025-05-29 19:46 ` Song Liu
2025-05-29 20:15 ` Al Viro
2025-05-29 21:07 ` Song Liu
2025-05-29 21:45 ` Al Viro
2025-05-29 22:13 ` Song Liu
2025-05-29 23:10 ` Al Viro
2025-05-30 0:42 ` Song Liu
2025-05-30 12:20 ` Mickaël Salaün
2025-05-30 18:43 ` Al Viro
2025-05-31 8:39 ` Mickaël Salaün
2025-06-02 9:32 ` Christian Brauner
2025-05-30 18:55 ` Song Liu
2025-05-31 8:40 ` Mickaël Salaün
2025-05-31 14:05 ` Tingmao Wang
2025-06-01 23:33 ` Song Liu
2025-06-04 0:58 ` Tingmao Wang
2025-06-02 9:30 ` Christian Brauner
2025-06-02 9:27 ` Christian Brauner
2025-06-02 13:27 ` Song Liu
2025-06-02 15:40 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2025-06-02 21:39 ` Song Liu
2025-05-28 22:26 ` [PATCH bpf-next 4/4] selftests/bpf: Add tests for bpf " Song Liu
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=20250602.Oqu6piethung@digikod.net \
--to=mic@digikod.net \
--cc=amir73il@gmail.com \
--cc=andrii@kernel.org \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=brauner@kernel.org \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=eddyz87@gmail.com \
--cc=gnoack@google.com \
--cc=jack@suse.cz \
--cc=jlayton@kernel.org \
--cc=josef@toxicpanda.com \
--cc=kernel-team@meta.com \
--cc=kpsingh@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=m@maowtm.org \
--cc=martin.lau@linux.dev \
--cc=mattbobrowski@google.com \
--cc=repnop@google.com \
--cc=song@kernel.org \
--cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
/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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).