Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20201112205141.775752-1-mic@digikod.net> <20201112205141.775752-2-mic@digikod.net>
In-Reply-To: <20201112205141.775752-2-mic@digikod.net>
From:   Jann Horn <jannh@google.com>
Date:   Sat, 21 Nov 2020 08:00:00 +0100
Message-ID: <CAG48ez0GryN4i0xCP22utLTqF5_o5J3nMBs+VC0DpQ+s09Bx6g@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v24 01/12] landlock: Add object management
To:     =?UTF-8?B?TWlja2HDq2wgU2FsYcO8bg==?= <mic@digikod.net>
Cc:     James Morris <jmorris@namei.org>,
        "Serge E . Hallyn" <serge@hallyn.com>,
        Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
        Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net>,
        Anton Ivanov <anton.ivanov@cambridgegreys.com>,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
        Casey Schaufler <casey@schaufler-ca.com>,
        Jeff Dike <jdike@addtoit.com>,
        Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>,
        Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>,
        Michael Kerrisk <mtk.manpages@gmail.com>,
        Richard Weinberger <richard@nod.at>,
        Shuah Khan <shuah@kernel.org>,
        Vincent Dagonneau <vincent.dagonneau@ssi.gouv.fr>,
        Kernel Hardening <kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com>,
        Linux API <linux-api@vger.kernel.org>,
        linux-arch <linux-arch@vger.kernel.org>,
        "open list:DOCUMENTATION" <linux-doc@vger.kernel.org>,
        linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
        kernel list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        "open list:KERNEL SELFTEST FRAMEWORK" 
        <linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org>,
        linux-security-module <linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org>,
        "the arch/x86 maintainers" <x86@kernel.org>,
        =?UTF-8?B?TWlja2HDq2wgU2FsYcO8bg==?= <mic@linux.microsoft.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, Nov 12, 2020 at 9:51 PM Micka=C3=ABl Sala=C3=BCn <mic@digikod.net> =
wrote:
> A Landlock object enables to identify a kernel object (e.g. an inode).
> A Landlock rule is a set of access rights allowed on an object.  Rules
> are grouped in rulesets that may be tied to a set of processes (i.e.
> subjects) to enforce a scoped access-control (i.e. a domain).
>
> Because Landlock's goal is to empower any process (especially
> unprivileged ones) to sandbox themselves, we cannot rely on a
> system-wide object identification such as file extended attributes.
> Indeed, we need innocuous, composable and modular access-controls.
>
> The main challenge with these constraints is to identify kernel objects
> while this identification is useful (i.e. when a security policy makes
> use of this object).  But this identification data should be freed once
> no policy is using it.  This ephemeral tagging should not and may not be
> written in the filesystem.  We then need to manage the lifetime of a
> rule according to the lifetime of its objects.  To avoid a global lock,
> this implementation make use of RCU and counters to safely reference
> objects.
>
> A following commit uses this generic object management for inodes.
>
> Cc: James Morris <jmorris@namei.org>
> Cc: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
> Cc: Serge E. Hallyn <serge@hallyn.com>
> Signed-off-by: Micka=C3=ABl Sala=C3=BCn <mic@linux.microsoft.com>
> Reviewed-by: Jann Horn <jannh@google.com>

Still looks good, except for one comment:

[...]
> +       /**
> +        * @lock: Guards against concurrent modifications.  This lock mig=
ht be
> +        * held from the time @usage drops to zero until any weak referen=
ces
> +        * from @underobj to this object have been cleaned up.
> +        *
> +        * Lock ordering: inode->i_lock nests inside this.
> +        */
> +       spinlock_t lock;

Why did you change this to "might be held" (v22 had "must")? Is the
"might" a typo?