|
Message-ID: <CALCETrWwTiz3kZTkEgOW24-DvhQq6LftwEXh77FD2G5o71yD7g@mail.gmail.com> Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2016 07:57:18 -0700 From: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net> To: Mickaël Salaün <mic@...ikod.net> Cc: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, Casey Schaufler <casey@...aufler-ca.com>, Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>, Daniel Mack <daniel@...que.org>, David Drysdale <drysdale@...gle.com>, "David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, Elena Reshetova <elena.reshetova@...el.com>, James Morris <james.l.morris@...cle.com>, Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>, Paul Moore <pmoore@...hat.com>, Sargun Dhillon <sargun@...gun.me>, "Serge E . Hallyn" <serge@...lyn.com>, Will Drewry <wad@...omium.org>, kernel-hardening <kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com>, Linux API <linux-api@...r.kernel.org>, LSM List <linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org>, Network Development <netdev@...r.kernel.org> Subject: Re: [RFC v2 08/10] landlock: Handle file system comparisons On Thu, Aug 25, 2016 at 7:10 AM, Mickaël Salaün <mic@...ikod.net> wrote: > > On 25/08/2016 13:12, Andy Lutomirski wrote: >> On Thu, Aug 25, 2016 at 3:32 AM, Mickaël Salaün <mic@...ikod.net> wrote: >>> Add eBPF functions to compare file system access with a Landlock file >>> system handle: >>> * bpf_landlock_cmp_fs_prop_with_struct_file(prop, map, map_op, file) >>> This function allows to compare the dentry, inode, device or mount >>> point of the currently accessed file, with a reference handle. >>> * bpf_landlock_cmp_fs_beneath_with_struct_file(opt, map, map_op, file) >>> This function allows an eBPF program to check if the current accessed >>> file is the same or in the hierarchy of a reference handle. >>> >>> The goal of file system handle is to abstract kernel objects such as a >>> struct file or a struct inode. Userland can create this kind of handle >>> thanks to the BPF_MAP_UPDATE_ELEM command. The element is a struct >>> landlock_handle containing the handle type (e.g. >>> BPF_MAP_HANDLE_TYPE_LANDLOCK_FS_FD) and a file descriptor. This could >>> also be any descriptions able to match a struct file or a struct inode >>> (e.g. path or glob string). >> >> This needs Eric's opinion. >> >> Also, where do all the struct file *'s get stashed? Are they >> preserved in the arraymap? What prevents reference cycles or absurdly >> large numbers of struct files getting pinned? > > Yes, the struct file are kept in the arraymap and dropped when there is > no more reference on them. Currently, the limitations are the maximum > number of open file descriptors referring to an arraymap and the maximum > number of eBPF Landlock programs loaded in a process > (LANDLOCK_PROG_LIST_MAX_PAGES in kernel/seccomp.c). > > What kind of reference cycles have you in mind? Shoving evil things into the arraymaps, e.g. unix sockets with SCM_RIGHTS messages pending, eBPF program references, the arraymap fd itself, another arraymap fd, etc. > > It probably needs another limit for kernel object references as well. > What is the best option here? Add another static limitation or use an > existing one? Dunno. If RLIMIT_FILE could be made to work, that would be nice. --Andy
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.