Re: [PATCH v5 05/15] landlock: landlock_add_rule syscall refactoring

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



You can rename the subject to "landlock: Refactor landlock_add_rule()"


On 16/05/2022 17:20, Konstantin Meskhidze wrote:
Landlock_add_rule syscall was refactored to support new
rule types in future Landlock versions. Add_rule_path_beneath()

nit: add_rule_path_beneath(), not Add_rule_path_beneath()

helper was added to support current filesystem rules. It is called
by the switch case.

You can rephrase (all commit messages) in the present form:

Refactor the landlock_add_rule() syscall with add_rule_path_beneath() to support new…

Refactor the landlock_add_rule() syscall to easily support for a new rule type in a following commit. The new add_rule_path_beneath() helper supports current filesystem rules.



Signed-off-by: Konstantin Meskhidze <konstantin.meskhidze@xxxxxxxxxx>
---

Changes since v3:
* Split commit.
* Refactoring landlock_add_rule syscall.

Changes since v4:
* Refactoring add_rule_path_beneath() and landlock_add_rule() functions
to optimize code usage.
* Refactoring base_test.c seltest: adds LANDLOCK_RULE_PATH_BENEATH
rule type in landlock_add_rule() call.

---
  security/landlock/syscalls.c                 | 105 ++++++++++---------
  tools/testing/selftests/landlock/base_test.c |   4 +-
  2 files changed, 59 insertions(+), 50 deletions(-)

diff --git a/security/landlock/syscalls.c b/security/landlock/syscalls.c
index 1db799d1a50b..412ced6c512f 100644
--- a/security/landlock/syscalls.c
+++ b/security/landlock/syscalls.c
@@ -274,67 +274,23 @@ static int get_path_from_fd(const s32 fd, struct path *const path)
  	return err;
  }

-/**
- * sys_landlock_add_rule - Add a new rule to a ruleset
- *
- * @ruleset_fd: File descriptor tied to the ruleset that should be extended
- *		with the new rule.
- * @rule_type: Identify the structure type pointed to by @rule_attr (only
- *             LANDLOCK_RULE_PATH_BENEATH for now).
- * @rule_attr: Pointer to a rule (only of type &struct
- *             landlock_path_beneath_attr for now).
- * @flags: Must be 0.
- *
- * This system call enables to define a new rule and add it to an existing
- * ruleset.
- *
- * Possible returned errors are:
- *
- * - EOPNOTSUPP: Landlock is supported by the kernel but disabled at boot time;
- * - EINVAL: @flags is not 0, or inconsistent access in the rule (i.e.
- *   &landlock_path_beneath_attr.allowed_access is not a subset of the
- *   ruleset handled accesses);
- * - ENOMSG: Empty accesses (e.g. &landlock_path_beneath_attr.allowed_access);
- * - EBADF: @ruleset_fd is not a file descriptor for the current thread, or a
- *   member of @rule_attr is not a file descriptor as expected;
- * - EBADFD: @ruleset_fd is not a ruleset file descriptor, or a member of
- *   @rule_attr is not the expected file descriptor type;
- * - EPERM: @ruleset_fd has no write access to the underlying ruleset;
- * - EFAULT: @rule_attr inconsistency.
- */
-SYSCALL_DEFINE4(landlock_add_rule, const int, ruleset_fd,
-		const enum landlock_rule_type, rule_type,
-		const void __user *const, rule_attr, const __u32, flags)
+static int add_rule_path_beneath(const int ruleset_fd, const void *const rule_attr)
  {
  	struct landlock_path_beneath_attr path_beneath_attr;
  	struct path path;
  	struct landlock_ruleset *ruleset;
  	int res, err;

-	if (!landlock_initialized)
-		return -EOPNOTSUPP;
-
-	/* No flag for now. */
-	if (flags)
-		return -EINVAL;
-
  	/* Gets and checks the ruleset. */

Like I already said, this needs to stay in landlock_add_rule(). I think there is some inconsistencies with other patches that rechange this part. Please review your patches and make clean patches that don't partially revert the previous ones.


  	ruleset = get_ruleset_from_fd(ruleset_fd, FMODE_CAN_WRITE);
  	if (IS_ERR(ruleset))
  		return PTR_ERR(ruleset);

-	if (rule_type != LANDLOCK_RULE_PATH_BENEATH) {
-		err = -EINVAL;
-		goto out_put_ruleset;
-	}
-
  	/* Copies raw user space buffer, only one type for now. */
  	res = copy_from_user(&path_beneath_attr, rule_attr,
-			     sizeof(path_beneath_attr));
-	if (res) {
-		err = -EFAULT;
-		goto out_put_ruleset;
-	}
+				sizeof(path_beneath_attr));
+	if (res)
+		return -EFAULT;

  	/*
  	 * Informs about useless rule: empty allowed_access (i.e. deny rules)
@@ -370,6 +326,59 @@ SYSCALL_DEFINE4(landlock_add_rule, const int, ruleset_fd,
  	return err;
  }

+/**
+ * sys_landlock_add_rule - Add a new rule to a ruleset
+ *
+ * @ruleset_fd: File descriptor tied to the ruleset that should be extended
+ *		with the new rule.
+ * @rule_type: Identify the structure type pointed to by @rule_attr (only
+ *             LANDLOCK_RULE_PATH_BENEATH for now).
+ * @rule_attr: Pointer to a rule (only of type &struct
+ *             landlock_path_beneath_attr for now).
+ * @flags: Must be 0.
+ *
+ * This system call enables to define a new rule and add it to an existing
+ * ruleset.
+ *
+ * Possible returned errors are:
+ *
+ * - EOPNOTSUPP: Landlock is supported by the kernel but disabled at boot time;
+ * - EINVAL: @flags is not 0, or inconsistent access in the rule (i.e.
+ *   &landlock_path_beneath_attr.allowed_access is not a subset of the rule's
+ *   accesses);
+ * - ENOMSG: Empty accesses (e.g. &landlock_path_beneath_attr.allowed_access);
+ * - EBADF: @ruleset_fd is not a file descriptor for the current thread, or a
+ *   member of @rule_attr is not a file descriptor as expected;
+ * - EBADFD: @ruleset_fd is not a ruleset file descriptor, or a member of
+ *   @rule_attr is not the expected file descriptor type (e.g. file open
+ *   without O_PATH);
+ * - EPERM: @ruleset_fd has no write access to the underlying ruleset;
+ * - EFAULT: @rule_attr inconsistency.
+ */
+SYSCALL_DEFINE4(landlock_add_rule,
+		const int, ruleset_fd, const enum landlock_rule_type, rule_type,
+		const void __user *const, rule_attr, const __u32, flags)
+{
+	int err;
+
+	if (!landlock_initialized)
+		return -EOPNOTSUPP;
+
+	/* No flag for now. */
+	if (flags)
+		return -EINVAL;
+
+	switch (rule_type) {
+	case LANDLOCK_RULE_PATH_BENEATH:
+		err = add_rule_path_beneath(ruleset_fd, rule_attr);
+		break;
+	default:
+		err = -EINVAL;
+		break;
+	}
+	return err;
+}
+
  /* Enforcement */

  /**
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/landlock/base_test.c b/tools/testing/selftests/landlock/base_test.c
index da9290817866..0c4c3a538d54 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/landlock/base_test.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/landlock/base_test.c
@@ -156,11 +156,11 @@ TEST(add_rule_checks_ordering)
  	ASSERT_LE(0, ruleset_fd);

  	/* Checks invalid flags. */
-	ASSERT_EQ(-1, landlock_add_rule(-1, 0, NULL, 1));
+	ASSERT_EQ(-1, landlock_add_rule(-1, LANDLOCK_RULE_PATH_BENEATH, NULL, 1));

This must not be changed! I specifically added these tests to make sure no one change the argument ordering checks…


  	ASSERT_EQ(EINVAL, errno);

  	/* Checks invalid ruleset FD. */
-	ASSERT_EQ(-1, landlock_add_rule(-1, 0, NULL, 0));
+	ASSERT_EQ(-1, landlock_add_rule(-1, LANDLOCK_RULE_PATH_BENEATH, NULL, 0));
  	ASSERT_EQ(EBADF, errno);

  	/* Checks invalid rule type. */
--
2.25.1




[Index of Archives]     [Netfitler Users]     [Berkeley Packet Filter]     [LARTC]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite Forum]

  Powered by Linux