From patchwork Mon Feb 24 16:02:15 2020 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Patchwork-Submitter: =?utf-8?q?Micka=C3=ABl_Sala=C3=BCn?= X-Patchwork-Id: 208759 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.8 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, INCLUDES_PATCH, MAILING_LIST_MULTI, MENTIONS_GIT_HOSTING, SIGNED_OFF_BY, SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS, USER_AGENT_GIT autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AE252C11D30 for ; Mon, 24 Feb 2020 16:08:02 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7B27720838 for ; Mon, 24 Feb 2020 16:08:02 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727474AbgBXQIC (ORCPT ); Mon, 24 Feb 2020 11:08:02 -0500 Received: from smtp-190c.mail.infomaniak.ch ([185.125.25.12]:57843 "EHLO smtp-190c.mail.infomaniak.ch" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726762AbgBXQIC (ORCPT ); Mon, 24 Feb 2020 11:08:02 -0500 X-Greylist: delayed 328 seconds by postgrey-1.27 at vger.kernel.org; Mon, 24 Feb 2020 11:07:59 EST Received: from smtp-3-0000.mail.infomaniak.ch (unknown [10.4.36.107]) by smtp-3-3000.mail.infomaniak.ch (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 977BE100389F3; Mon, 24 Feb 2020 17:02:36 +0100 (CET) Received: from localhost (unknown [94.23.54.103]) by smtp-3-0000.mail.infomaniak.ch (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 48R6K81fbBzlh9Dl; Mon, 24 Feb 2020 17:02:36 +0100 (CET) From: =?utf-8?q?Micka=C3=ABl_Sala=C3=BCn?= To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Cc: =?utf-8?q?Micka=C3=ABl_Sala=C3=BCn?= , Al Viro , Andy Lutomirski , Arnd Bergmann , Casey Schaufler , Greg Kroah-Hartman , James Morris , Jann Horn , Jonathan Corbet , Kees Cook , Michael Kerrisk , =?utf-8?q?Micka=C3=ABl_Sala?= =?utf-8?b?w7xu?= , "Serge E . Hallyn" , Shuah Khan , Vincent Dagonneau , kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com, linux-api@vger.kernel.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org, linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org, x86@kernel.org Subject: [RFC PATCH v14 10/10] landlock: Add user and kernel documentation Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2020 17:02:15 +0100 Message-Id: <20200224160215.4136-11-mic@digikod.net> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.25.1 In-Reply-To: <20200224160215.4136-1-mic@digikod.net> References: <20200224160215.4136-1-mic@digikod.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Antivirus: Dr.Web (R) for Unix mail servers drweb plugin ver.6.0.2.8 X-Antivirus-Code: 0x100000 Sender: linux-kselftest-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org This documentation can be built with the Sphinx framework. Another location might be more appropriate, though. Signed-off-by: Mickaël Salaün Reviewed-by: Vincent Dagonneau Cc: Andy Lutomirski Cc: James Morris Cc: Kees Cook Cc: Serge E. Hallyn --- Changes since v13: * Rewrote the documentation according to the major revamp. Previous version: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20191104172146.30797-8-mic@digikod.net/ --- Documentation/security/index.rst | 1 + Documentation/security/landlock/index.rst | 18 ++ Documentation/security/landlock/kernel.rst | 44 ++++ Documentation/security/landlock/user.rst | 233 +++++++++++++++++++++ 4 files changed, 296 insertions(+) create mode 100644 Documentation/security/landlock/index.rst create mode 100644 Documentation/security/landlock/kernel.rst create mode 100644 Documentation/security/landlock/user.rst diff --git a/Documentation/security/index.rst b/Documentation/security/index.rst index fc503dd689a7..4d213e76ddf4 100644 --- a/Documentation/security/index.rst +++ b/Documentation/security/index.rst @@ -15,3 +15,4 @@ Security Documentation self-protection siphash tpm/index + landlock/index diff --git a/Documentation/security/landlock/index.rst b/Documentation/security/landlock/index.rst new file mode 100644 index 000000000000..dbd33b96ce60 --- /dev/null +++ b/Documentation/security/landlock/index.rst @@ -0,0 +1,18 @@ +========================================= +Landlock LSM: unprivileged access control +========================================= + +:Author: Mickaël Salaün + +The goal of Landlock is to enable to restrict ambient rights (e.g. global +filesystem access) for a set of processes. Because Landlock is a stackable +LSM, it makes possible to create safe security sandboxes as new security layers +in addition to the existing system-wide access-controls. This kind of sandbox +is expected to help mitigate the security impact of bugs or +unexpected/malicious behaviors in user-space applications. Landlock empower any +process, including unprivileged ones, to securely restrict themselves. + +.. toctree:: + + user + kernel diff --git a/Documentation/security/landlock/kernel.rst b/Documentation/security/landlock/kernel.rst new file mode 100644 index 000000000000..b87769909029 --- /dev/null +++ b/Documentation/security/landlock/kernel.rst @@ -0,0 +1,44 @@ +============================== +Landlock: kernel documentation +============================== + +Landlock's goal is to create scoped access-control (i.e. sandboxing). To +harden a whole system, this feature should be available to any process, +including unprivileged ones. Because such process may be compromised or +backdoored (i.e. untrusted), Landlock's features must be safe to use from the +kernel and other processes point of view. Landlock's interface must therefore +expose a minimal attack surface. + +Landlock is designed to be usable by unprivileged processes while following the +system security policy enforced by other access control mechanisms (e.g. DAC, +LSM). Indeed, a Landlock rule shall not interfere with other access-controls +enforced on the system, only add more restrictions. + +Any user can enforce Landlock rulesets on their processes. They are merged and +evaluated according to the inherited ones in a way that ensure that only more +constraints can be added. + + +Guiding principles for safe access controls +=========================================== + +* A Landlock rule shall be focused on access control on kernel objects instead + of syscall filtering (i.e. syscall arguments), which is the purpose of + seccomp-bpf. +* To avoid multiple kind of side-channel attacks (e.g. leak of security + policies, CPU-based attacks), Landlock rules shall not be able to + programmatically communicate with user space. +* Kernel access check shall not slow down access request from unsandboxed + processes. +* Computation related to Landlock operations (e.g. enforce a ruleset) shall + only impact the processes requesting them. + + +Landlock rulesets and domains +============================= + +A domain is a read-only ruleset tied to a set of subjects (i.e. tasks). A +domain can transition to a new one which is the intersection of the constraints +from the current and a new ruleset. The definition of a subject is implicit +for a task sandboxing itself, which makes the reasoning much easier and helps +avoid pitfalls. diff --git a/Documentation/security/landlock/user.rst b/Documentation/security/landlock/user.rst new file mode 100644 index 000000000000..cbd7f61fca8c --- /dev/null +++ b/Documentation/security/landlock/user.rst @@ -0,0 +1,233 @@ +================================= +Landlock: userspace documentation +================================= + +Landlock rules +============== + +A Landlock rule enables to describe an action on an object. An object is +currently a file hierarchy, and the related filesystem actions are defined in +`Access rights`_. A set of rules are aggregated in a ruleset, which can then +restricts the thread enforcing it, and its future children. + + +Defining and enforcing a security policy +---------------------------------------- + +Before defining a security policy, an application should first probe for the +features supported by the running kernel, which is important to be compatible +with older kernels. This can be done thanks to the `landlock` syscall (cf. +:ref:`syscall`). + +.. code-block:: c + + struct landlock_attr_features attr_features; + + if (landlock(LANDLOCK_CMD_GET_FEATURES, LANDLOCK_OPT_GET_FEATURES, + sizeof(attr_features), &attr_features)) { + perror("Failed to probe the Landlock supported features"); + return 1; + } + +Then, we need to create the ruleset that will contains our rules. For this +example, the ruleset will contains rules which only allow read actions, but +write actions will be denied. The ruleset then needs to handle both of these +kind of actions. To have a backward compatibility, these actions should be +ANDed with the supported ones. + +.. code-block:: c + + int ruleset_fd; + struct landlock_attr_ruleset ruleset = { + .handled_access_fs = + LANDLOCK_ACCESS_FS_READ | + LANDLOCK_ACCESS_FS_READDIR | + LANDLOCK_ACCESS_FS_EXECUTE | + LANDLOCK_ACCESS_FS_WRITE | + LANDLOCK_ACCESS_FS_TRUNCATE | + LANDLOCK_ACCESS_FS_CHMOD | + LANDLOCK_ACCESS_FS_CHOWN | + LANDLOCK_ACCESS_FS_CHGRP | + LANDLOCK_ACCESS_FS_LINK_TO | + LANDLOCK_ACCESS_FS_RENAME_FROM | + LANDLOCK_ACCESS_FS_RENAME_TO | + LANDLOCK_ACCESS_FS_RMDIR | + LANDLOCK_ACCESS_FS_UNLINK | + LANDLOCK_ACCESS_FS_MAKE_CHAR | + LANDLOCK_ACCESS_FS_MAKE_DIR | + LANDLOCK_ACCESS_FS_MAKE_REG | + LANDLOCK_ACCESS_FS_MAKE_SOCK | + LANDLOCK_ACCESS_FS_MAKE_FIFO | + LANDLOCK_ACCESS_FS_MAKE_BLOCK | + LANDLOCK_ACCESS_FS_MAKE_SYM, + }; + + ruleset.handled_access_fs &= attr_features.access_fs; + ruleset_fd = landlock(LANDLOCK_CMD_CREATE_RULESET, + LANDLOCK_OPT_CREATE_RULESET, sizeof(ruleset), &ruleset); + if (ruleset_fd < 0) { + perror("Failed to create a ruleset"); + return 1; + } + +We can now add a new rule to this ruleset thanks to the returned file +descriptor referring to this ruleset. The rule will only enable to read the +file hierarchy ``/usr``. Without other rule, write actions would then be +denied by the ruleset. To add ``/usr`` to the ruleset, we open it with the +``O_PATH`` flag and fill the &struct landlock_attr_path_beneath with this file +descriptor. + +.. code-block:: c + + int err; + struct landlock_attr_path_beneath path_beneath = { + .ruleset_fd = ruleset_fd, + .allowed_access = + LANDLOCK_ACCESS_FS_READ | + LANDLOCK_ACCESS_FS_READDIR | + LANDLOCK_ACCESS_FS_EXECUTE, + }; + + path_beneath.allowed_access &= attr_features.access_fs; + path_beneath.parent_fd = open("/usr", O_PATH | O_CLOEXEC); + if (path_beneath.parent_fd < 0) { + perror("Failed to open file"); + close(ruleset_fd); + return 1; + } + err = landlock(LANDLOCK_CMD_ADD_RULE, LANDLOCK_OPT_ADD_RULE_PATH_BENEATH, + sizeof(path_beneath), &path_beneath); + close(path_beneath.parent_fd); + if (err) { + perror("Failed to update ruleset"); + close(ruleset_fd); + return 1; + } + +We now have a ruleset with one rule allowing read access to ``/usr`` while +denying all accesses featured in ``attr_features.access_fs`` to everything else +on the filesystem. The next step is to restrict the current thread from +gaining more privileges (e.g. thanks to a SUID binary). + +.. code-block:: c + + if (prctl(PR_SET_NO_NEW_PRIVS, 1, 0, 0, 0)) { + perror("Failed to restrict privileges"); + close(ruleset_fd); + return 1; + } + +The current thread is now ready to sandbox itself with the ruleset. + +.. code-block:: c + + struct landlock_attr_enforce attr_enforce = { + .ruleset_fd = ruleset_fd, + }; + + if (landlock(LANDLOCK_CMD_ENFORCE_RULESET, LANDLOCK_OPT_ENFORCE_RULESET, + sizeof(attr_enforce), &attr_enforce)) { + perror("Failed to enforce ruleset"); + close(ruleset_fd); + return 1; + } + close(ruleset_fd); + +If this last system call succeeds, the current thread is now restricted and +this policy will be enforced on all its subsequently created children as well. +Once a thread is landlocked, there is no way to remove its security policy, +only adding more restrictions is allowed. These threads are now in a new +Landlock domain, merge of their parent one (if any) with the new ruleset. + +A full working code can be found in `samples/landlock/sandboxer.c`_. + + +Inheritance +----------- + +Every new thread resulting from a :manpage:`clone(2)` inherits Landlock program +restrictions from its parent. This is similar to the seccomp inheritance (cf. +:doc:`/userspace-api/seccomp_filter`) or any other LSM dealing with task's +:manpage:`credentials(7)`. For instance, one process' thread may apply +Landlock rules to itself, but they will not be automatically applied to other +sibling threads (unlike POSIX thread credential changes, cf. +:manpage:`nptl(7)`). + + +Ptrace restrictions +------------------- + +A sandboxed process has less privileges than a non-sandboxed process and must +then be subject to additional restrictions when manipulating another process. +To be allowed to use :manpage:`ptrace(2)` and related syscalls on a target +process, a sandboxed process should have a subset of the target process rules, +which means the tracee must be in a sub-domain of the tracer. + + +.. _syscall: + +The `landlock` syscall and its arguments +======================================== + +.. kernel-doc:: security/landlock/syscall.c + :functions: sys_landlock + +Commands +-------- + +.. kernel-doc:: include/uapi/linux/landlock.h + :functions: landlock_cmd + +Options +------- + +.. kernel-doc:: include/uapi/linux/landlock.h + :functions: options_intro + options_get_features options_create_ruleset + options_add_rule options_enforce_ruleset + +Attributes +---------- + +.. kernel-doc:: include/uapi/linux/landlock.h + :functions: landlock_attr_features landlock_attr_ruleset + landlock_attr_path_beneath landlock_attr_enforce + +Access rights +------------- + +.. kernel-doc:: include/uapi/linux/landlock.h + :functions: fs_access + + +Questions and answers +===================== + +What about user space sandbox managers? +--------------------------------------- + +Using user space process to enforce restrictions on kernel resources can lead +to race conditions or inconsistent evaluations (i.e. `Incorrect mirroring of +the OS code and state +`_). + +What about namespaces and containers? +------------------------------------- + +Namespaces can help create sandboxes but they are not designed for +access-control and then miss useful features for such use case (e.g. no +fine-grained restrictions). Moreover, their complexity can lead to security +issues, especially when untrusted processes can manipulate them (cf. +`Controlling access to user namespaces `_). + + +Additional documentation +======================== + +See https://landlock.io + + +.. Links +.. _samples/landlock/sandboxer.c: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux.git/tree/samples/landlock/sandboxer.c +.. _tools/testing/selftests/landlock/: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux.git/tree/tools/testing/selftests/landlock/ +.. _tools/testing/selftests/landlock/test_ptrace.c: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux.git/tree/tools/testing/selftests/landlock/test_ptrace.c