[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <PH7PR11MB6353950F607F7B8F274A3550FD8E9@PH7PR11MB6353.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
Date: Wed, 20 Jul 2022 22:16:14 +0000
From: "Schaufler, Casey" <casey.schaufler@...el.com>
To: Axel Rasmussen <axelrasmussen@...gle.com>,
Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
"Dave Hansen" <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
"Dmitry V . Levin" <ldv@...linux.org>,
Gleb Fotengauer-Malinovskiy <glebfm@...linux.org>,
Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>, Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>,
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
Mel Gorman <mgorman@...hsingularity.net>,
Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@...cle.com>,
Mike Rapoport <rppt@...nel.org>,
"Amit, Nadav" <namit@...are.com>, Peter Xu <peterx@...hat.com>,
Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>,
Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@...gle.com>,
Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>, zhangyi <yi.zhang@...wei.com>
CC: "linux-doc@...r.kernel.org" <linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
"linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v4 0/5] userfaultfd: add /dev/userfaultfd for fine grained
access control
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Axel Rasmussen <axelrasmussen@...gle.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, July 19, 2022 12:56 PM
> To: Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>; Andrew Morton
> <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>; Dave Hansen
> <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>; Dmitry V . Levin <ldv@...linux.org>; Gleb
> Fotengauer-Malinovskiy <glebfm@...linux.org>; Hugh Dickins
> <hughd@...gle.com>; Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>; Jonathan Corbet
> <corbet@....net>; Mel Gorman <mgorman@...hsingularity.net>; Mike
> Kravetz <mike.kravetz@...cle.com>; Mike Rapoport <rppt@...nel.org>;
> Amit, Nadav <namit@...are.com>; Peter Xu <peterx@...hat.com>;
> Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>; Suren Baghdasaryan
> <surenb@...gle.com>; Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>; zhangyi
> <yi.zhang@...wei.com>
> Cc: Axel Rasmussen <axelrasmussen@...gle.com>; linux-
> doc@...r.kernel.org; linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org; linux-
> kernel@...r.kernel.org; linux-mm@...ck.org; linux-
> kselftest@...r.kernel.org
> Subject: [PATCH v4 0/5] userfaultfd: add /dev/userfaultfd for fine grained
> access control
I assume that leaving the LSM mailing list off of the CC is purely
accidental. Please, please include us in the next round.
>
> This series is based on torvalds/master.
>
> The series is split up like so:
> - Patch 1 is a simple fixup which we should take in any case (even by itself).
> - Patches 2-6 add the feature, configurable selftest support, and docs.
>
> Why not ...?
> ============
>
> - Why not /proc/[pid]/userfaultfd? The proposed use case for this is for one
> process to open a userfaultfd which can intercept another process' page
> faults. This seems to me like exactly what CAP_SYS_PTRACE is for, though,
> so I
> think this use case can simply use a syscall without the powers
> CAP_SYS_PTRACE
> grants being "too much".
>
> - Why not use a syscall? Access to syscalls is generally controlled by
> capabilities. We don't have a capability which is used for userfaultfd access
> without also granting more / other permissions as well, and adding a new
> capability was rejected [1].
>
> - It's possible a LSM could be used to control access instead. I suspect
> adding a brand new one just for this would be rejected,
You won't know if you don't ask.
> but I think some
> existing ones like SELinux can be used to filter syscall access. Enabling
> SELinux for large production deployments which don't already use it is
> likely to be a huge undertaking though, and I don't think this use case by
> itself is enough to motivate that kind of architectural change.
>
> Changelog
> =========
>
> v3->v4:
> - Picked up an Acked-by on 5/5.
> - Updated cover letter to cover "why not ...".
> - Refactored userfaultfd_allowed() into userfaultfd_syscall_allowed().
> [Peter]
> - Removed obsolete comment from a previous version. [Peter]
> - Refactored userfaultfd_open() in selftest. [Peter]
> - Reworded admin-guide documentation. [Mike, Peter]
> - Squashed 2 commits adding /dev/userfaultfd to selftest and making
> selftest
> configurable. [Peter]
> - Added "syscall" test modifier (the default behavior) to selftest. [Peter]
>
> v2->v3:
> - Rebased onto linux-next/akpm-base, in order to be based on top of the
> run_vmtests.sh refactor which was merged previously.
> - Picked up some Reviewed-by's.
> - Fixed ioctl definition (_IO instead of _IOWR), and stopped using
> compat_ptr_ioctl since it is unneeded for ioctls which don't take a pointer.
> - Removed the "handle_kernel_faults" bool, simplifying the code. The result
> is
> logically equivalent, but simpler.
> - Fixed userfaultfd selftest so it returns KSFT_SKIP appropriately.
> - Reworded documentation per Shuah's feedback on v2.
> - Improved example usage for userfaultfd selftest.
>
> v1->v2:
> - Add documentation update.
> - Test *both* userfaultfd(2) and /dev/userfaultfd via the selftest.
>
> [1]: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/686276b9-4530-2045-6bd8-
> 170e5943abe4@...aufler-ca.com/T/
>
> Axel Rasmussen (5):
> selftests: vm: add hugetlb_shared userfaultfd test to run_vmtests.sh
> userfaultfd: add /dev/userfaultfd for fine grained access control
> userfaultfd: selftests: modify selftest to use /dev/userfaultfd
> userfaultfd: update documentation to describe /dev/userfaultfd
> selftests: vm: add /dev/userfaultfd test cases to run_vmtests.sh
>
> Documentation/admin-guide/mm/userfaultfd.rst | 41 +++++++++++-
> Documentation/admin-guide/sysctl/vm.rst | 3 +
> fs/userfaultfd.c | 69 ++++++++++++++++----
> include/uapi/linux/userfaultfd.h | 4 ++
> tools/testing/selftests/vm/run_vmtests.sh | 11 +++-
> tools/testing/selftests/vm/userfaultfd.c | 69 +++++++++++++++++---
> 6 files changed, 169 insertions(+), 28 deletions(-)
>
> --
> 2.37.0.170.g444d1eabd0-goog
Powered by blists - more mailing lists