On Wed, Mar 8, 2023 at 9:30 PM Casey Schaufler <casey@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 3/7/2023 3:51 AM, Mickaël Salaün wrote: > > > > On 22/02/2023 21:08, Casey Schaufler wrote: > >> Create a system call lsm_get_self_attr() to provide the security > >> module maintained attributes of the current process. > >> Create a system call lsm_set_self_attr() to set a security > >> module maintained attribute of the current process. > >> Historically these attributes have been exposed to user space via > >> entries in procfs under /proc/self/attr. > >> > >> The attribute value is provided in a lsm_ctx structure. The structure > >> identifys the size of the attribute, and the attribute value. The format > >> of the attribute value is defined by the security module. A flags field > >> is included for LSM specific information. It is currently unused and > >> must > >> be 0. The total size of the data, including the lsm_ctx structure and > >> any > >> padding, is maintained as well. > >> > >> struct lsm_ctx { > >> __u64 id; > >> __u64 flags; > >> __u64 len; > >> __u64 ctx_len; > >> __u8 ctx[]; > >> }; > >> > >> Two new LSM hooks are used to interface with the LSMs. > >> security_getselfattr() collects the lsm_ctx values from the > >> LSMs that support the hook, accounting for space requirements. > >> security_setselfattr() identifies which LSM the attribute is > >> intended for and passes it along. > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Casey Schaufler <casey@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > >> --- > >> Documentation/userspace-api/lsm.rst | 15 ++++ > >> include/linux/lsm_hook_defs.h | 4 ++ > >> include/linux/lsm_hooks.h | 9 +++ > >> include/linux/security.h | 19 +++++ > >> include/linux/syscalls.h | 4 ++ > >> include/uapi/linux/lsm.h | 33 +++++++++ > >> kernel/sys_ni.c | 4 ++ > >> security/Makefile | 1 + > >> security/lsm_syscalls.c | 104 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > >> security/security.c | 82 ++++++++++++++++++++++ > >> 10 files changed, 275 insertions(+) > >> create mode 100644 security/lsm_syscalls.c > >> > > > > [...] > > > >> +/** > >> + * security_setselfattr - Set an LSM attribute on the current process. > >> + * @attr: which attribute to return > >> + * @ctx: the user-space source for the information > >> + * @size: the size of the data > >> + * > >> + * Set an LSM attribute for the current process. The LSM, attribute > >> + * and new value are included in @ctx. > >> + * > >> + * Returns 0 on seccess, an LSM specific value on failure. > >> + */ > >> +int security_setselfattr(u64 __user attr, struct lsm_ctx __user *ctx, > >> + size_t __user size) > >> +{ > >> + struct security_hook_list *hp; > >> + struct lsm_ctx lctx; > >> + > >> + if (size < sizeof(*ctx)) > > > > If the lsm_ctx struct could grow in the future, we should check the > > size of the struct to the last field for compatibility reasons, see > > Landlock's copy_min_struct_from_user(). > > Because the lsm_ctx structure ends with the variable length context there's > no way to append new fields to it. The structure can't grow. The lsm_ctx can grow; that was one of the reasons for having both a @len and @ctx_len field in the struct, the other being padding. Of course any LSM wanting to place information beyond the end of @ctx will need to indicate that with a bit in the @flags field. Having said that, there are probably other ways to pass other data via a lsm_ctx struct, e.g. binary @ctx values, but I don't think we want to rule anything out at this point. Also, as a reminder, just because we *can* do something, doesn't mean we will do something. Any LSM that wants to pass something other than a string @ctx value will face a *lot* of scrutiny. -- paul-moore.com