Linux Security Modules development
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Christian Brauner <brauner@kernel.org>
To: "Mickaël Salaün" <mic@digikod.net>
Cc: "Günther Noack" <gnoack@google.com>,
	"Paul Moore" <paul@paul-moore.com>,
	"Serge E . Hallyn" <serge@hallyn.com>,
	"Justin Suess" <utilityemal77@gmail.com>,
	"Lennart Poettering" <lennart@poettering.net>,
	"Mikhail Ivanov" <ivanov.mikhail1@huawei-partners.com>,
	"Nicolas Bouchinet" <nicolas.bouchinet@oss.cyber.gouv.fr>,
	"Shervin Oloumi" <enlightened@google.com>,
	"Tingmao Wang" <m@maowtm.org>,
	kernel-team@cloudflare.com, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v1 00/11] Landlock: Namespace and capability control
Date: Wed, 25 Mar 2026 13:34:31 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260325-ausmerzen-wenngleich-7cf068c7bd9f@brauner> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260312100444.2609563-1-mic@digikod.net>

On Thu, Mar 12, 2026 at 11:04:33AM +0100, Mickaël Salaün wrote:
> Namespaces are a fundamental building block for containers and
> application sandboxes, but user namespace creation significantly widens
> the kernel attack surface.  CVE-2022-0185 (filesystem mount parsing),
> CVE-2022-25636 and CVE-2023-32233 (netfilter), and CVE-2022-0492 (cgroup
> v1 release_agent) all demonstrate vulnerabilities exploitable only
> through capabilities gained via user namespaces.  Some distributions
> block user namespace creation entirely, but this removes a useful
> isolation primitive.  Fine-grained control allows trusted programs to
> use namespaces while preventing unnecessary exposure for programs that
> do not need them.
> 
> Existing mechanisms (user.max_*_namespaces sysctls, userns_create LSM
> hook, PR_SET_NO_NEW_PRIVS, and capset) each address part of this threat
> but none provides per-process, fine-grained control over both namespace
> types and capabilities.  Container runtimes resort to seccomp-based
> clone/unshare filtering, but seccomp cannot dereference clone3's flag
> structure, forcing runtimes to block clone3 entirely.
> 
> Landlock's composable layer model enables several patterns: a user
> session manager can restrict namespace types and capabilities broadly
> while allowing trusted programs to create the namespaces they need, and
> each deeper layer can further restrict the allowed set.  Container
> runtimes can similarly deny namespace creation inside managed
> containers.
> 
> This series adds two new permission categories to Landlock:
> 
> - LANDLOCK_PERM_NAMESPACE_ENTER: Restricts which namespace types a
>   sandboxed process can acquire: both creation (unshare/clone) and entry
>   (setns).  User namespace creation has no capability check in the
>   kernel, so this is the only enforcement mechanism for that entry
>   point.
> 
> - LANDLOCK_PERM_CAPABILITY_USE: Restricts which Linux capabilities a
>   sandboxed process can use, regardless of how they were obtained
>   (including through user namespace creation).
> 
> Both use new handled_perm and LANDLOCK_RULE_* constants following the
> existing allow-list model.  The UAPI uses raw CAP_* and CLONE_NEW*
> values directly; unknown values are silently accepted for forward
> compatibility (the allow-list denies them by default).  The Landlock ABI
> version is bumped from 8 to 9.
> 
> The handled_perm infrastructure is designed to be reusable by future
> permission categories.  The last patch documents the design rationale
> for the permission model and the criteria for choosing between
> handled_access_*, handled_perm, and scoped.  A patch series to add
> socket creation control is under review [2]; it could benefit from the
> same permission model to achieve complete deny-by-default coverage of
> socket creation.
> 
> This series builds on Christian Brauner's namespace LSM blob RFC [1],
> included as patch 1.
> 
> Christian, could you please review patch 3?  It adds a FOR_EACH_NS_TYPE
> X-macro to ns_common_types.h and derives CLONE_NS_ALL, replacing inline
> CLONE_NEW* flag enumerations in nsproxy.c and fork.c.

This all looks good to me, thanks! I'd really love to see this go in.

  parent reply	other threads:[~2026-03-25 12:34 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 50+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-03-12 10:04 [RFC PATCH v1 00/11] Landlock: Namespace and capability control Mickaël Salaün
2026-03-12 10:04 ` [RFC PATCH v1 01/11] security: add LSM blob and hooks for namespaces Mickaël Salaün
2026-03-25 12:31   ` Christian Brauner
2026-04-09 16:40     ` Mickaël Salaün
2026-04-10  9:35       ` Christian Brauner
2026-04-22 21:21   ` Günther Noack
2026-04-23  0:19   ` Paul Moore
2026-04-24 18:56     ` Mickaël Salaün
2026-04-24 19:28       ` Paul Moore
2026-04-27 14:57         ` Christian Brauner
2026-04-27 21:46           ` Paul Moore
2026-03-12 10:04 ` [RFC PATCH v1 02/11] security: Add LSM_AUDIT_DATA_NS for namespace audit records Mickaël Salaün
2026-03-25 12:32   ` Christian Brauner
2026-04-01 16:38     ` Mickaël Salaün
2026-04-01 18:48       ` Mickaël Salaün
2026-04-09 13:29         ` Christian Brauner
2026-04-22 21:21   ` Günther Noack
2026-03-12 10:04 ` [RFC PATCH v1 03/11] nsproxy: Add FOR_EACH_NS_TYPE() X-macro and CLONE_NS_ALL Mickaël Salaün
2026-03-25 12:33   ` Christian Brauner
2026-03-25 15:26     ` Mickaël Salaün
2026-03-26 14:22   ` (subset) " Christian Brauner
2026-03-12 10:04 ` [RFC PATCH v1 04/11] landlock: Wrap per-layer access masks in struct layer_rights Mickaël Salaün
2026-04-10  1:45   ` Tingmao Wang
2026-04-22 21:29   ` Günther Noack
2026-03-12 10:04 ` [RFC PATCH v1 05/11] landlock: Enforce namespace entry restrictions Mickaël Salaün
2026-04-10  1:45   ` Tingmao Wang
2026-05-08 15:46   ` Günther Noack
2026-03-12 10:04 ` [RFC PATCH v1 06/11] landlock: Enforce capability restrictions Mickaël Salaün
2026-04-22 21:36   ` Günther Noack
2026-05-08 15:54   ` Günther Noack
2026-03-12 10:04 ` [RFC PATCH v1 07/11] selftests/landlock: Drain stale audit records on init Mickaël Salaün
2026-03-24 13:27   ` Günther Noack
2026-03-12 10:04 ` [RFC PATCH v1 08/11] selftests/landlock: Add namespace restriction tests Mickaël Salaün
2026-03-12 10:04 ` [RFC PATCH v1 09/11] selftests/landlock: Add capability " Mickaël Salaün
2026-03-12 10:04 ` [RFC PATCH v1 10/11] samples/landlock: Add capability and namespace restriction support Mickaël Salaün
2026-04-22 21:20   ` Günther Noack
2026-04-23 13:51     ` Mickaël Salaün
2026-03-12 10:04 ` [RFC PATCH v1 11/11] landlock: Add documentation for capability and namespace restrictions Mickaël Salaün
2026-03-12 14:48   ` Justin Suess
2026-04-23 13:51     ` Mickaël Salaün
2026-04-23 16:01       ` Justin Suess
2026-04-23 16:08         ` Justin Suess
2026-04-22 20:38   ` Günther Noack
2026-04-23 13:52     ` Mickaël Salaün
2026-05-08 15:13       ` Günther Noack
2026-03-25 12:34 ` Christian Brauner [this message]
2026-04-20 15:06 ` [RFC PATCH v1 00/11] Landlock: Namespace and capability control Günther Noack
2026-04-21  8:24   ` Mickaël Salaün
2026-04-22 21:16     ` Günther Noack
2026-04-23 13:50       ` 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:
  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=20260325-ausmerzen-wenngleich-7cf068c7bd9f@brauner \
    --to=brauner@kernel.org \
    --cc=enlightened@google.com \
    --cc=gnoack@google.com \
    --cc=ivanov.mikhail1@huawei-partners.com \
    --cc=kernel-team@cloudflare.com \
    --cc=lennart@poettering.net \
    --cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=m@maowtm.org \
    --cc=mic@digikod.net \
    --cc=nicolas.bouchinet@oss.cyber.gouv.fr \
    --cc=paul@paul-moore.com \
    --cc=serge@hallyn.com \
    --cc=utilityemal77@gmail.com \
    /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