From: "Günther Noack" <gnoack@google.com>
To: "Mickaël Salaün" <mic@digikod.net>
Cc: "Panagiotis \"Ivory\" Vasilopoulos" <git@n0toose.net>,
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>,
Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>,
linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Dan Cojocaru <dan@dcdev.ro>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] landlock: Expand restrict flags example for ABI version 8
Date: Tue, 24 Mar 2026 10:48:29 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <acJa_56LtPeeH956@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260323.sheiHaR5uRoo@digikod.net>
Hello!
On Mon, Mar 23, 2026 at 07:56:21PM +0100, Mickaël Salaün wrote:
> Thanks! I pushed your patch in next with a minor fix.
>
> Günther, does it look good to you?
>
> On Wed, Mar 04, 2026 at 07:13:04PM +0100, Panagiotis "Ivory" Vasilopoulos wrote:
> > Add LANDLOCK_RESTRICT_SELF_TSYNC to the backwards compatibility example
> > for restrict flags. This introduces completeness, similar to that of
> > the ruleset attributes example. However, as the new example can impact
> > enforcement in certain cases, an appropriate warning is also included.
> >
> > Additionally, I modified the two comments of the example to make them
> > more consistent with the ruleset attributes example's.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Panagiotis 'Ivory' Vasilopoulos <git@n0toose.net>
> > Co-developed-by: Dan Cojocaru <dan@dcdev.ro>
> > Signed-off-by: Dan Cojocaru <dan@dcdev.ro>
> > ---
> > Changes in v4:
> > - Make warning somewhat more terse, merge comments.
> > - Remove some sensationalization. ("Don't copy-paste this just yet!")
> > - Apply Günther's suggestion (v3 "recycled" some phrases, was long)
> > - ... but also retain some of the wording on ABI differences
> > - Provide a brief overview that contextualizes the example further:
> > - Clarify the difference behind ABI < 8 & ABI v8, to avoid
> > misunderstandings on which option is the default.
> > - Make "linear reading" easier.
> > - Based on Mickaël's feedback: Avoid cans of worms w.r.t. use cases
> > - Link to v3: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20260228-landlock-docs-add-tsync-example-v3-1-140ab50f0524@n0toose.net
> >
> > Changes in v3:
> > - Add __attribute__((fallthrough)) like in earlier example.
> > - Improve comment for LANDLOCK_RESTRICT_SELF_TSYNC (ABI < 8) example.
> > - Add relevant warning for ABI < 8 example based on Günther's feedback.
> > - Link to v2: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20260221-landlock-docs-add-tsync-example-v2-1-60990986bba5@n0toose.net
> >
> > Changes in v2:
> > - Fix formatting error.
> > - Link to v1: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20260221-landlock-docs-add-tsync-example-v1-1-f89383809eb4@n0toose.net
> > ---
> > Documentation/userspace-api/landlock.rst | 22 ++++++++++++++++++----
> > 1 file changed, 18 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/Documentation/userspace-api/landlock.rst b/Documentation/userspace-api/landlock.rst
> > index 13134bccdd39d78ddce3daf454f32dda162ce91b..64c7138a788d74f99da0a71428da392b3d873bf8 100644
> > --- a/Documentation/userspace-api/landlock.rst
> > +++ b/Documentation/userspace-api/landlock.rst
> > @@ -196,13 +196,27 @@ similar backwards compatibility check is needed for the restrict flags
> > (see sys_landlock_restrict_self() documentation for available flags):
> >
> > .. code-block:: c
> > -
> > - __u32 restrict_flags = LANDLOCK_RESTRICT_SELF_LOG_NEW_EXEC_ON;
> > - if (abi < 7) {
> > - /* Clear logging flags unsupported before ABI 7. */
> > + __u32 restrict_flags =
> > + LANDLOCK_RESTRICT_SELF_LOG_NEW_EXEC_ON |
> > + LANDLOCK_RESTRICT_SELF_TSYNC;
> > + switch (abi) {
> > + case 1 ... 6:
> > + /* Clear logging flags unsupported for ABI < 7 */
> > restrict_flags &= ~(LANDLOCK_RESTRICT_SELF_LOG_SAME_EXEC_OFF |
> > LANDLOCK_RESTRICT_SELF_LOG_NEW_EXEC_ON |
> > LANDLOCK_RESTRICT_SELF_LOG_SUBDOMAINS_OFF);
> > + __attribute__((fallthrough));
> > + case 7:
> > + /*
> > + * Removes multithreaded enforcement flag unsupported for ABI < 8
> > + *
> > + * WARNING: Without this flag, calling landlock_restrict_self(2) is
> > + * only equivalent if the calling process is single-threaded. Below
> > + * ABI v8 (and as of ABI v8, when not using this flag), a Landlock
> > + * policy would only be enforced for the calling thread and its
> > + * children (and not for all threads, including parents and siblings).
> > + */
> > + restrict_flags &= ~LANDLOCK_RESTRICT_SELF_TSYNC;
> > }
> >
> > The next step is to restrict the current thread from gaining more privileges
> >
> > ---
> > base-commit: ceb977bfe9e8715e6cd3a4785c7aab8ea5cd2b77
> > change-id: 20260221-landlock-docs-add-tsync-example-e8fd5c64a366
> >
> > Best regards,
> > --
> > Panagiotis "Ivory" Vasilopoulos <git@n0toose.net>
> >
> >
Apologies for the delay, this must have slipped through the cracks.
Thanks for bringing it up again. Yes, this looks good.
Signed-off-by: Günther Noack <gnoack@google.com>
—Günther
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-03-24 9:48 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-03-04 18:13 [PATCH v4] landlock: Expand restrict flags example for ABI version 8 Panagiotis "Ivory" Vasilopoulos
2026-03-23 18:56 ` Mickaël Salaün
2026-03-24 9:48 ` Günther Noack [this message]
2026-03-24 15:06 ` Mickaël Salaün
2026-03-24 15:30 ` Günther Noack
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=acJa_56LtPeeH956@google.com \
--to=gnoack@google.com \
--cc=corbet@lwn.net \
--cc=dan@dcdev.ro \
--cc=git@n0toose.net \
--cc=linux-doc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mic@digikod.net \
--cc=skhan@linuxfoundation.org \
/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