[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20250131163059.1139617-6-mic@digikod.net>
Date: Fri, 31 Jan 2025 17:30:40 +0100
From: Mickaël Salaün <mic@...ikod.net>
To: Eric Paris <eparis@...hat.com>,
Paul Moore <paul@...l-moore.com>,
Günther Noack <gnoack@...gle.com>,
"Serge E . Hallyn" <serge@...lyn.com>
Cc: Mickaël Salaün <mic@...ikod.net>,
Ben Scarlato <akhna@...gle.com>,
Casey Schaufler <casey@...aufler-ca.com>,
Charles Zaffery <czaffery@...lox.com>,
Daniel Burgener <dburgener@...ux.microsoft.com>,
Francis Laniel <flaniel@...ux.microsoft.com>,
James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org>,
Jann Horn <jannh@...gle.com>,
Jeff Xu <jeffxu@...gle.com>,
Jorge Lucangeli Obes <jorgelo@...gle.com>,
Kees Cook <kees@...nel.org>,
Konstantin Meskhidze <konstantin.meskhidze@...wei.com>,
Matt Bobrowski <mattbobrowski@...gle.com>,
Mikhail Ivanov <ivanov.mikhail1@...wei-partners.com>,
Phil Sutter <phil@....cc>,
Praveen K Paladugu <prapal@...ux.microsoft.com>,
Robert Salvet <robert.salvet@...lox.com>,
Shervin Oloumi <enlightened@...gle.com>,
Song Liu <song@...nel.org>,
Tahera Fahimi <fahimitahera@...il.com>,
Tyler Hicks <code@...icks.com>,
audit@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH v5 05/24] landlock: Prepare to use credential instead of domain for network
This cosmetic change that is needed for audit support, specifically to
be able to filter according to cross-execution boundaries.
Optimize current_check_access_socket() to only handle the access
request.
Remove explicit domain->num_layers check which is now part of the
landlock_get_applicable_subject() call.
Cc: Günther Noack <gnoack@...gle.com>
Signed-off-by: Mickaël Salaün <mic@...ikod.net>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20250131163059.1139617-6-mic@digikod.net
---
Changes since v4:
- New patch.
---
security/landlock/net.c | 23 ++++++++++-------------
1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)
diff --git a/security/landlock/net.c b/security/landlock/net.c
index d5dcc4407a19..53dc9d94a5c2 100644
--- a/security/landlock/net.c
+++ b/security/landlock/net.c
@@ -39,10 +39,6 @@ int landlock_append_net_rule(struct landlock_ruleset *const ruleset,
return err;
}
-static const struct access_masks any_net = {
- .net = ~0,
-};
-
static int current_check_access_socket(struct socket *const sock,
struct sockaddr *const address,
const int addrlen,
@@ -54,14 +50,14 @@ static int current_check_access_socket(struct socket *const sock,
struct landlock_id id = {
.type = LANDLOCK_KEY_NET_PORT,
};
- const struct landlock_ruleset *const dom =
- landlock_get_applicable_domain(landlock_get_current_domain(),
- any_net);
+ const struct access_masks masks = {
+ .net = access_request,
+ };
+ const struct landlock_cred_security *const subject =
+ landlock_get_applicable_subject(current_cred(), masks, NULL);
- if (!dom)
+ if (!subject)
return 0;
- if (WARN_ON_ONCE(dom->num_layers < 1))
- return -EACCES;
/* Checks if it's a (potential) TCP socket. */
if (sock->type != SOCK_STREAM)
@@ -146,9 +142,10 @@ static int current_check_access_socket(struct socket *const sock,
id.key.data = (__force uintptr_t)port;
BUILD_BUG_ON(sizeof(port) > sizeof(id.key.data));
- rule = landlock_find_rule(dom, id);
- access_request = landlock_init_layer_masks(
- dom, access_request, &layer_masks, LANDLOCK_KEY_NET_PORT);
+ rule = landlock_find_rule(subject->domain, id);
+ access_request = landlock_init_layer_masks(subject->domain,
+ access_request, &layer_masks,
+ LANDLOCK_KEY_NET_PORT);
if (landlock_unmask_layers(rule, access_request, &layer_masks,
ARRAY_SIZE(layer_masks)))
return 0;
--
2.48.1
Powered by blists - more mailing lists