5/27/2024 11:48 AM, Günther Noack wrote:
Hello Mikhail!
Thanks for sending another revision of this patch set!
On Fri, May 24, 2024 at 05:30:05PM +0800, Mikhail Ivanov wrote:
Add hook to security_socket_post_create(), which checks whether the socket
type and family are allowed by domain. Hook is called after initializing
the socket in the network stack to not wrongfully return EACCES for a
family-type pair, which is considered invalid by the protocol.
Signed-off-by: Mikhail Ivanov <ivanov.mikhail1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
## Some observations that *do not* need to be addressed in this commit, IMHO:
get_raw_handled_socket_accesses, get_current_socket_domain and
current_check_access_socket are based on the similarly-named functions from
net.c (and fs.c), and it makes sense to stay consistent with these.
There are some possible refactorings that could maybe be applied to that code,
but given that the same ones would apply to net.c as well, it's probably best to
address these separately.
* Should get_raw_handled_socket_accesses be inlined
It's a fairly simple and compact function, so compiler should inline it
without any problems. Mickaël was against optional inlines [1].
[1]
https://lore.kernel.org/linux-security-module/5c6c99f7-4218-1f79-477e-5d943c9809fd@xxxxxxxxxxx/
* Does the WARN_ON_ONCE(dom->num_layers < 1) check have the right return code?
Looks like a rudimental check. `dom` is always NULL when `num_layers`< 1
(see get_*_domain functions).
* Can we refactor out commonalities (probably not worth it right now though)?
I had a few ideas about refactoring commonalities, as currently landlock
has several repetitive patterns in the code. But solution requires a
good design and a separate patch. Probably it's worth opening an issue
on github. WDYT?
## The only actionable feedback that I have that is specific to this commit is:
In the past, we have introduced new (non-test) Landlock functionality in a
single commit -- that way, we have no "loose ends" in the code between these two
commits, and that simplifies it for people who want to patch your feature onto
other kernel trees. (e.g. I think we should maybe merge commit 01/12 and 02/12
into a single commit.) WDYT?
Yeah, this two should be merged and tests commits as well. I just wanted
to do this in one of the latest patch versions to simplify code review.
—Günther
