From: Justin Suess <utilityemal77@gmail.com>
To: gnoack3000@gmail.com, mic@digikod.net
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org,
Justin Suess <utilityemal77@gmail.com>
Subject: [PATCH v4 1/5] landlock: Check landlock_restrict_self(2)'s flags before privileges
Date: Sun, 9 Aug 2026 11:45:19 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260809154544.1253100-2-utilityemal77@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260809154544.1253100-1-utilityemal77@gmail.com>
sys_landlock_restrict_self() currently checks the no_new_privs /
CAP_SYS_ADMIN requirement before validating the flags argument. An
unprivileged caller without no_new_privs thus gets EPERM even when the
passed flags are invalid, hiding the EINVAL error.
Move the no_new_privs / CAP_SYS_ADMIN check just after the flags check
so that malformed calls consistently error out with EINVAL whatever the
caller's privileges, the same way seccomp(2) validates its flags before
checking no_new_privs.
Update the restrict_self_checks_ordering test accordingly.
Cc: Mickaël Salaün <mic@digikod.net>
Signed-off-by: Justin Suess <utilityemal77@gmail.com>
---
Notes:
v4:
- New patch, following Mickaël's review of the main patch: check
the flags argument before the no_new_privs / CAP_SYS_ADMIN
requirement, in the same order as seccomp(2).
security/landlock/syscalls.c | 8 ++++----
tools/testing/selftests/landlock/base_test.c | 6 +++++-
2 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
diff --git a/security/landlock/syscalls.c b/security/landlock/syscalls.c
index 36b02892c62f..e3ef7b980c82 100644
--- a/security/landlock/syscalls.c
+++ b/security/landlock/syscalls.c
@@ -535,6 +535,10 @@ SYSCALL_DEFINE2(landlock_restrict_self, const int, ruleset_fd, const __u32,
if (!is_initialized())
return -EOPNOTSUPP;
+ if ((flags | LANDLOCK_MASK_RESTRICT_SELF) !=
+ LANDLOCK_MASK_RESTRICT_SELF)
+ return -EINVAL;
+
/*
* Similar checks as for seccomp(2), except that an -EPERM may be
* returned.
@@ -543,10 +547,6 @@ SYSCALL_DEFINE2(landlock_restrict_self, const int, ruleset_fd, const __u32,
!ns_capable_noaudit(current_user_ns(), CAP_SYS_ADMIN))
return -EPERM;
- if ((flags | LANDLOCK_MASK_RESTRICT_SELF) !=
- LANDLOCK_MASK_RESTRICT_SELF)
- return -EINVAL;
-
/* Translates "off" flag to boolean. */
log_same_exec = !(flags & LANDLOCK_RESTRICT_SELF_LOG_SAME_EXEC_OFF);
/* Translates "on" flag to boolean. */
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/landlock/base_test.c b/tools/testing/selftests/landlock/base_test.c
index cbd3c1669951..f3c126d5c003 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/landlock/base_test.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/landlock/base_test.c
@@ -255,8 +255,12 @@ TEST(restrict_self_checks_ordering)
/* Checks unprivileged enforcement without no_new_privs. */
drop_caps(_metadata);
+ /*
+ * The flags validity is checked before the no_new_privs /
+ * CAP_SYS_ADMIN requirement.
+ */
ASSERT_EQ(-1, landlock_restrict_self(-1, -1));
- ASSERT_EQ(EPERM, errno);
+ ASSERT_EQ(EINVAL, errno);
ASSERT_EQ(-1, landlock_restrict_self(-1, 0));
ASSERT_EQ(EPERM, errno);
ASSERT_EQ(-1, landlock_restrict_self(ruleset_fd, 0));
--
2.55.0
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-08-09 15:45 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-08-09 15:45 [PATCH v4 0/5] Implement LANDLOCK_RESTRICT_SELF_NO_NEW_PRIVS Justin Suess
2026-08-09 15:45 ` Justin Suess [this message]
2026-08-09 15:45 ` [PATCH v4 3/5] selftests/landlock: Test LANDLOCK_RESTRICT_SELF_NO_NEW_PRIVS Justin Suess
2026-08-09 15:45 ` [PATCH v4 4/5] landlock: Document LANDLOCK_RESTRICT_SELF_NO_NEW_PRIVS Justin Suess
2026-08-09 15:45 ` [PATCH v4 5/5] samples/landlock: Add LANDLOCK_RESTRICT_SELF_NO_NEW_PRIVS to sampler Justin Suess
2026-08-09 15:53 ` [PATCH v4 0/5] Implement LANDLOCK_RESTRICT_SELF_NO_NEW_PRIVS Justin Suess
2026-08-09 21:24 ` [PATCH v4 2/5] landlock: Add LANDLOCK_RESTRICT_SELF_NO_NEW_PRIVS Justin Suess
2026-08-11 7:19 ` [PATCH v4 0/5] Implement LANDLOCK_RESTRICT_SELF_NO_NEW_PRIVS 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=20260809154544.1253100-2-utilityemal77@gmail.com \
--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