From: "Mickaël Salaün" <mic@digikod.net>
To: "Panagiotis \"Ivory\" Vasilopoulos" <git@n0toose.net>
Cc: "Günther Noack" <gnoack@google.com>,
"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 v3] landlock: Expand restrict flags example for ABI version 8
Date: Tue, 3 Mar 2026 19:01:00 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260303.Paechahp4eco@digikod.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260228-landlock-docs-add-tsync-example-v3-1-140ab50f0524@n0toose.net>
On Sat, Feb 28, 2026 at 10:36:59PM +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 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 | 28 ++++++++++++++++++++++++----
> 1 file changed, 24 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/Documentation/userspace-api/landlock.rst b/Documentation/userspace-api/landlock.rst
> index 13134bccdd39d78ddce3daf454f32dda162ce91b..b71ac7aa308260b8141e5d35248fb68cec6dcba9 100644
> --- a/Documentation/userspace-api/landlock.rst
> +++ b/Documentation/userspace-api/landlock.rst
> @@ -196,13 +196,33 @@ 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!
> + * Don't copy-paste this just yet! This example impacts enforcement
> + * and can potentially decrease protection if misused.
What could be the use case when that would be an issue? What would be
the consequence wrt just tampering with a sibling thread?
> + *
> + * Below ABI v8, a Landlock policy can only be enforced for the calling
> + * thread and its children. This behavior remains a default for ABI v8,
> + * but the flag ``LANDLOCK_RESTRICT_SELF_TSYNC`` can now be used to
> + * enforce policies across all threads of the calling process. If an
> + * application's Landlock integration was designed under the assumption
> + * that the flag is used (such as when children threads are responsible
> + * for enforcing and/or overriding policies of parents and siblings),
> + * removing said flag can decrease protection for older Linux versions.
In this case, the application *must* check the ABI version and exit with
an error if it is not supported. That's the same use case as programs
wishing to sandbox themselves at least with a specific set of
restrictions.
> + */
> + 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>
>
>
prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-03-03 18:20 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-02-28 21:36 [PATCH v3] landlock: Expand restrict flags example for ABI version 8 Panagiotis "Ivory" Vasilopoulos
2026-03-03 9:08 ` Günther Noack
2026-03-03 18:01 ` Mickaël Salaün [this message]
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=20260303.Paechahp4eco@digikod.net \
--to=mic@digikod.net \
--cc=corbet@lwn.net \
--cc=dan@dcdev.ro \
--cc=git@n0toose.net \
--cc=gnoack@google.com \
--cc=linux-doc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org \
--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